Published AAO appeal decisions

A talent agency petitioned for a hip-hop/street jazz dancer and instructor for O-1A classification. The agency claimed an award, lead roles in productions, and published material about the beneficiary. The AAO found the award lacked national or international prominence, the dancer was one of several performers rather than lead, and articles did not establish distinguished roles, dismissing the appeal.

A representational painter sought EB-1A classification. The AAO found she met only two criteria: published material and display of artwork in exhibitions. Her claim for original contributions was rejected because favorable reviews and sales do not demonstrate field-wide impact. Appeal dismissed.

A staff physician claimed extraordinary ability in medicine under EB-1A. The AAO found he met only two criteria: judging and scholarly articles. His claims for membership, original contributions, and critical role were rejected as insufficient. Appeals dismissed because three criteria required.

A cardiologist and researcher with advanced degree sought national interest waiver of job offer requirement under Dhanasar framework. The AAO found the proposed research had substantial merit and national importance, but the petitioner was not well positioned to advance it and waiver was not in balance beneficial to the U.S. Appeal dismissed.

A car restoration company sponsored a Brazilian restoration designer and fabricator for O-1A visa. Director found one criterion met (significant recognition). Petitioner claimed five others on appeal. AAO found none met: no evidence of future lead role, no national recognition in major publications, no commercial success, and prospective salary not demonstrably high for the field.

Metallurgical engineer with advanced degree sought NIW for continued manufacturing work. Under Dhanasar, petitioner established EB-2 eligibility but failed to demonstrate national importance; proposed work affected only employer and customers, not broader industry or field. Appeal dismissed.

Spanish language teacher and specialist sought EB-1A extraordinary ability in education. Petitioner claimed six criteria but provided insufficient documentation for each. Director found only two criteria met; petitioner failed to meet the required three. AAO affirmed dismissal, finding no extraordinary ability demonstrated.

Operetta performer sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification in arts. Petitioner met three initial evidentiary criteria (judging, exhibitions, published material) but failed final merits determination. AAO found petitioner talented but not demonstrating sustained acclaim or top-tier status required for extraordinary ability.

BIM specialist in sustainable architecture design sought EB-2 national interest waiver. Petitioner qualified for advanced-degree classification but failed to respond to RFE requesting evidence under three-part Dhanasar framework. Appeal dismissed as abandoned and on merits for insufficient national importance.

A dance studio sought O-2 classification for an individual accompanying a competitive ballroom dancer whose concurrent O-1 petition was filed. The AAO dismissed the appeal because the O-1 petition had been denied and its appeal dismissed, leaving no O-1 individual to support, so the O-2 petition could not be approved.

Mathematics professor claimed extraordinary ability in education and sought EB-1A classification. Petitioner met one of ten required criteria (scholarly articles) but did not satisfy awards, original contributions, critical role, or salary requirements. AAO dismissed appeal for failure to meet minimum three-criterion threshold.

An attorney, mediator, journalist and author claimed extraordinary ability. The AAO found the petitioner satisfied only two of ten required criteria: judging and scholarly articles. Because three criteria are required, the appeal was dismissed without a final merits determination.

A director sought extraordinary ability classification in art. The service center denied the petition. On appeal the petitioner stated a brief would follow but filed nothing and identified no erroneous conclusion. The appeal was summarily dismissed for that failure, so no criteria were analyzed.

Research and development engineer sought EB-2 national interest waiver. Petitioner established advanced degree and was well positioned to advance proposed engineering and software work. However, failed to demonstrate prospective impact beyond company clients sufficient for national importance. Appeal dismissed.

A thoroughbred training and racing proprietor filed a petition for an internationally recognized athlete under the P-1A classification. The director denied it. The AAO summarily dismissed the appeal because the petitioner never identified a specific erroneous conclusion of law or fact and submitted no promised brief or evidence.

A representational painter conducting collaborative shows sought EB-1A classification in the arts. The petitioner met only two of three required criteria: published material and exhibitions. Original contributions claim failed because sales and local gallery success do not demonstrate impact on the field as a whole. Petitioner also failed to show intent to continue work in visual arts. Appeal dismissed.

Film director and screenwriter appealed EB-1A denial. Met only one of ten criteria (judging). AAO reversed director's favorable finding on awards and rejected claims of published material, original contributions, and high salary due to insufficient documentation and specificity.

A youth soccer academy petitions for O-1A classification for an experienced soccer coach. The academy claimed five criteria but satisfied none. The AAO upheld dismissal because the beneficiary failed to meet the threshold of at least three criteria through proper initial evidence.

Plastic surgeon appealed EB-2 national interest waiver denial under Dhanasar framework. Met first prong (substantial merit and national importance of proposed research). Failed second prong: insufficient evidence he was well-positioned to advance endeavor; lacks documentation of impact or reputation in field.

An Indian classical dancer sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. AAO held petitioner met only one of ten required criteria (exhibitions) and failed to establish three-criterion threshold, finding no one-time major award or aggregate evidence of extraordinary ability and sustained national or international acclaim.

A supply chain analyst with advanced degrees sought EB-2 national interest waiver for statistical analysis and traffic route optimization work. AAO held the proposed endeavor lacked sufficient national importance as impact was limited to the petitioner's company, not the field broadly, failing the first Dhanasar prong.

Chinese classical dancer claimed extraordinary ability through awards, published material, original contributions, and artistic display. AAO found she met only one criterion (artistic display); awards not nationally or internationally recognized, articles in low-circulation publications not major media, and contributions lacked supporting documentation, falling short of three-criterion requirement.

A pop singer sought extraordinary ability classification, claiming a major award and eight regulatory criteria. The appeals office found no qualifying one-time achievement and fewer than three criteria satisfied, citing missing evidence of recognition, membership requirements, media details and sales receipts. The appeal was dismissed, with the aggregate record also falling short.

Show horse stable petitioned for trainer classified as extraordinary ability in athletics. Petitioner claimed extraordinary ability and submitted comparable evidence under regulatory alternative. AAO dismissed appeal, finding petitioner failed to meet three regulatory criteria and comparable evidence was insufficient.