Published AAO appeal decisions

Real estate company petitioned for beneficiary as extraordinary ability alien in business. AAO summarily dismissed appeal for failure to identify specific director errors or provide promised brief and evidence within eighteen months.

Athlete sought EB-1A classification. AAO rejected procedural challenge to request for evidence, found athlete met awards criterion but failed overall final merits analysis showing sustained acclaim among top percentage.

A creative director in advertising sought EB-1A classification based on six awards from a university. The AAO found these awards, though labeled as excellence awards, did not demonstrate nationally or internationally recognized status. Overall evidence failed to establish top-tier sustained acclaim.

The petitioner is an operations research analyst who sought extraordinary ability classification, claiming at least three regulatory criteria on appeal. The AAO dismissed the appeal, treating the published material claim as abandoned and concluding that the evidence overall did not show sustained national or international acclaim.

Karate player and instructor claiming extraordinary ability under EB-1A. Petitioner failed to demonstrate awards were nationally or internationally recognized; evidence showed recognition only at individual events. Achievements insufficient to establish extraordinary ability. Appeal dismissed.

Scientific researcher in synthetic carbohydrate chemistry claiming extraordinary ability under EB-1A. Petitioner failed to meet awards criterion; single institutional funding award does not satisfy regulatory requirement for nationally or internationally recognized prizes in plural. Appeal dismissed.

A ballet dancer sought EB-1A classification, claiming a one-time achievement through a competition gold medal and at least three regulatory criteria. The AAO held the medal was not a major, internationally recognized award and the record did not show sustained acclaim or top-of-field standing, so it dismissed the appeal.

Self-petitioner seeks EB-1A as financial manager in business. Met fewer than three regulatory criteria and lacked sustained national or international acclaim. AAO found evidence shows talent but does not demonstrate exceptional achievement setting petitioner significantly above others.

Self-petitioner seeks EB-1A as soccer coach. Petitioner's competitive playing career ended in late 1980s and no sustained national or international acclaim shown as coach. AAO found achievements significantly above others in field not demonstrated.

Athletic professional claiming extraordinary ability under EB-1A. Petitioner presented evidence of awards and achievements. AAO found the evidence insufficient to establish sustained national or international acclaim or placement in the very top of the field, dismissing the appeal.

An acrobatic performer sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The petitioner claimed at least three evidentiary categories. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding awards not nationally or internationally recognized and evidence insufficient to demonstrate the petitioner ranks among the very top in the field.

Ballroom dancer and instructor seeking EB-1A classification via employer petition. Claimed awards and national team membership. AAO found insufficient evidence of nationally recognized awards and no proof team membership required outstanding achievements. Appeal dismissed; sustained acclaim not established.

A marketing and advertising vice president sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The petitioner claimed at least three criteria but the decision analyzed only the awards criterion, finding no documented receipt of nationally or internationally recognized prizes. The petition was dismissed because evidence did not demonstrate extraordinary ability.

A scientist claiming extraordinary ability in sciences. Appealing a denial, counsel asserted the petitioner met at least three regulatory criteria but offered only general assertions without specific evidence or addressing director's findings. AAO summarily dismissed for failure to identify specific errors or provide substantive appeal arguments.

Postdoctoral researcher in life sciences seeking extraordinary ability classification. Claimed multiple criteria including major award. AAO held petitioner did not meet three regulatory criteria and lacks sustained national or international acclaim required for extraordinary ability classification.

Medical director claimed six EB-1A criteria. AAO dismissed appeal because petitioner failed to establish sustained national or international acclaim or extraordinary ability. Director found petitioner did not satisfy any claimed criteria, and three criteria were abandoned on appeal.

Competitive swimmer claimed three regulatory criteria including awards and sought comparable evidence consideration. AAO dismissed because evidence does not establish that petitioner's achievements set her significantly above almost all others at national or international level.

Visual effects professional claimed extraordinary ability through multiple regulatory criteria and comparable evidence. AAO affirmed dismissal because petitioner failed to meet the high burden of demonstrating sustained national or international acclaim and belonging among the very top of the field, despite meeting high salary criterion.

A medical technology company petitioned for a senior scientist in nanotechnology and biomaterials. The beneficiary failed to demonstrate nationally or internationally recognized awards or sustained acclaim. The AAO found achievements not significantly above almost all others in the field at national or international level and dismissed the appeal.

A self-represented economics professor sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The petitioner failed to establish requisite sustained national or international acclaim through any of the regulatory criteria. The AAO found achievements not persuasively set him significantly above almost all others in his field and dismissed.

A neuroscientist filing for EB-1A extraordinary ability was denied. The petitioner established only the scholarly articles criterion but failed to meet three total criteria. The AAO found deficiencies in awards, published material about the applicant, and original contributions. The final merits determination concluded the evidence was insufficient for top-tier status.

An artist sought extraordinary ability classification, and counsel on appeal asserted that four criteria were met, covering awards, judging, exhibitions and commercial success. The appeal was summarily dismissed because counsel identified no specific error in the denial and the promised brief and evidence never arrived over fifteen months.

Postdoctoral research scientist sought EB-1A classification. Claimed at least three criteria including membership and published material. AAO found membership requirement unmet and published material evidence insufficient, and concluded overall evidence does not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim required for extraordinary ability.

Urban developer sought EB-1A classification. Claimed eligibility under awards criterion, arguing event venue selection constituted national acclaim award. AAO rejected argument, holding awards must be personally received by alien not derived from organizational affiliation, and found evidence insufficient for sustained national or international acclaim.

Business professional's petition for extraordinary ability lacked extensive documentation of sustained acclaim. Beneficiary claimed to meet at least three regulatory criteria but petitioner failed to establish major award or comparable evidence of highest tier recognition.