Published AAO appeal decisions

Business consultant and executive self-petitioner claimed three EB-1A criteria. AAO dismissed motion to reopen because evidence was either available during original RFE or postdated the petition filing, violating the requirement to establish eligibility at time of petition.

A singer sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. After denial and a summary dismissal of the appeal, the petitioner filed a motion to reopen. The AAO dismissed the motion as untimely, since it was filed 105 days after the decision and the delay was not shown to be reasonable or beyond his control.

A visual artist sought EB-1A classification. The AAO dismissed a second motion to reopen and reconsider because petitioner did not provide new facts with documentary support and did not establish that prior legal rulings misapplied law or policy; record satisfies only two criteria.

Esthetician who operates beauty clinic and school in Brazil seeks EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Met only one criterion; failed three others required for advancement to final merits. AAO dismissed appeal, finding insufficient evidence of sustained national or international acclaim.

Squash coach who competed as junior player claimed four evidentiary criteria on appeal. AAO found only membership and critical role met, with one criterion established on appeal. Final merits determination found insufficient evidence of sustained national or international acclaim or status among very top of field.

A professor seeks EB-1A visa. Appeal dismissed because petitioner satisfied only one of required three initial evidentiary criteria. Published material and artistic display criteria were not demonstrated; leading role criterion was not reached. Petitioner lacks evidence of sustained national or international acclaim.

Communication engineer sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. AAO affirmed that petitioner met at least three evidentiary criteria but dismissed appeal, finding totality of evidence does not demonstrate sustained acclaim or rise to very top of field.

Legal educator seeks EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Claimed four criteria including membership and scholarly articles. AAO found membership criterion not met, treated published material and judging as abandoned through failure to respond to RFE, and determined aggregate evidence fails to show sustained national or international acclaim required for classification.

A pharmacist sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. She claimed seven criteria on appeal but had abandoned three (membership, published material, scholarly articles) during RFE. AAO found she failed to meet at least three criteria; abandoned criteria were not reconsidered. Awards and original contributions were not adequately documented. Appeal dismissed.

An embossing artist sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The service center found two criteria met: judging and display. On appeal, the petitioner claimed four additional criteria but the AAO rejected awards, published materials, and original contributions for lack of specificity and documentation. With only two criteria met, the appeal was dismissed.

A dog sled racer sought extraordinary ability classification based on multiple World Cup medals claimed as top prizes in her field. The AAO rejected the motion to reconsider, holding that World Cup medals lack sufficient public recognition beyond the sport's governing body to constitute major internationally recognized awards.

A water polo player claimed four EB-1A criteria but satisfied only one. AAO affirmed dismissal, finding no major award, insufficient criteria met, and no evidence of the extraordinary sustained acclaim required for EB-1A classification at the sport's highest level.

A business consultant mentoring immigrant entrepreneurs claimed extraordinary ability. The AAO found he did not meet the threshold of three evidentiary criteria and, alternatively, that he failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim and place among the very top of his field.

Environmental engineer claimed six criteria for extraordinary ability. AAO affirmed judging and scholarly articles criteria but rejected membership, published material, and original contributions. No evidence of sustained national or international acclaim or top-tier status required for EB-1A classification.

A real estate broker seeks extraordinary ability classification. She claimed membership and high salary criteria. The AAO affirmed denial because she did not receive a major award, did not meet three alternative criteria, and did not establish sustained national or international acclaim required for EB-1A.

A business executive in the pomegranate industry sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The AAO dismissed motions to reopen and reconsider, finding the petitioner failed to establish three required criteria on published material and high salary, and did not meet the initial evidentiary threshold.

Co-founder and CEO of financial technology company claiming extraordinary ability through lesser awards, memberships, published materials, and leadership role. AAO found awards criterion not met because award belonged to employer; membership criterion not met because petitioner failed to demonstrate it applies; and overall record lacks evidence of sustained acclaim among the very top of the field.

Martial artist from Uzbekistan seeks extraordinary ability classification. Met four initial criteria but dismissed on final merits. Documented achievements only through 2018; gap of years without evidence of sustained national or international acclaim through filing date.

A chief executive officer and entrepreneur seeks EB-1A classification claiming published material, awards, and membership criteria. The AAO withdrew the service center's favorable finding on published material, rejected awards and membership claims for insufficient evidence, and found the petitioner failed to meet the threshold of three qualifying criteria.

A scientific researcher sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The AAO dismissed a combined motion to reopen and reconsider because the petitioner failed to submit new facts or identify deficiencies in the prior dismissal; resubmitted evidence previously rejected and could not consider post-petition publications.

Financial analyst seeks EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Claimed at least three of ten criteria. AAO found no major international award and rejected high salary criterion on improper comparison basis, leaving petitioner below three-criterion threshold. Reserved remaining criteria. Dismissed appeal.

Business consultant self-petitioner claimed six extraordinary ability criteria. AAO dismissed motion to reconsider, upholding prior findings that published material, original contributions, and scholarly articles criteria were not met. Membership and leading role criteria were reserved as unnecessary since three criteria minimum was not satisfied.

A singer-composer self-petitioned for EB-1A. Demonstrated two criteria: lesser awards and exhibition display. Failed to establish three required criteria. AAO affirmed denial because the evidentiary threshold was not met, reserving final merits analysis.

Professional soccer player seeking EB-1A as intending soccer coach. AAO dismissed appeal, finding only two of six claimed criteria met. Petitioner lacked coaching evidence and sustained acclaim in new field; transition from athlete to coach does not satisfy extraordinary ability standard for small percentage at field's top.