Published AAO appeal decisions

A hockey player from Russia self-petitioned for extraordinary ability classification, having satisfied at least three initial criteria. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding that while criteria were met, the totality of evidence—youth and junior achievements, plus professional play in lower-tier leagues—failed to demonstrate he is among the small percentage at the very top of the field.

Gospel music singer sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Director found two criteria met (published material, exhibitions). AAO affirmed awards and membership criteria not met; petitioner failed to establish three criteria minimum. Final merits determination not reached; appeal dismissed.

Business professional in financial technology seeks EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. AAO dismissed appeal, finding petitioner met only one required criterion (leading critical role) out of three needed; original contributions lacked major significance and salary was not substantially higher than comparable positions.

Decision addresses EB-2 exceptional ability classification with NIW request, not NIW under Dhanasar framework as stated in visa attribute. Petitioner failed to meet three-criterion threshold for exceptional ability; NIW determination not reached. Appeal dismissed.

A pole and aerial sport performer and instructor claimed four extraordinary ability criteria: awards, published material, judging and exhibitions. On service motion after litigation, the AAO withdrew the earlier awards finding because competition placements were unsupported or not shown to be nationally recognized. It dismissed the appeal, finding neither the threshold nor sustained acclaim established.

Industrial engineering doctoral student and researcher seeks NIW for EB-2 classification to continue research on graph neural networks for environmental monitoring and real-time video processing. AAO found endeavor nationally important but petitioner lacked PhD-level credentials, demonstrated record of success in the field, concrete plan, or progress toward the specific endeavor; appeal dismissed.

Environmental engineer and entrepreneur sought EB-2 NIW for forestry management and sustainable land consulting company. AAO dismissed because beneficiary failed to establish underlying EB-2 exceptional ability eligibility, meeting only two of six regulatory criteria and lacking requisite expertise level.

Ph.D. student in computer science pursuing generative AI research sought NIW under Dhanasar. AAO found proposed endeavor had substantial merit and national importance, but petitioner failed second prong: insufficient evidence of being well positioned to advance research through citations, progress, or field recognition.

A specialist in prevention and investigation of financial crimes and money laundering sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding petitioner failed to establish any of the claimed eight initial criteria and could not meet the three-criterion threshold; final merits determination also failed.

Food processing business manager and co-founder seeks EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Claimed multiple criteria including awards, membership, published material, judging, original contributions, and exhibitions. AAO found only published material criterion met; one of three required criteria insufficient to satisfy initial evidence requirement.

Earthquake engineering researcher with advanced degree seeks NIW for research on soil-structure interactions in seismic design. First prong met; second prong failed because article citations and expert support lack evidence that research has advanced the field sufficiently to show petitioner well positioned to advance proposed endeavor.

Financial risk specialist sought EB-1A classification. Service center found judging and original contributions met; AAO withdrew both findings, concluding judging students does not meet regulatory requirements and contributions lacked evidence of significant impact. Petitioner failed to meet three criteria threshold.

SAP consultant self-petitioned for EB-2 NIW seeking to optimize enterprise solutions for small and medium enterprises. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding the proposed endeavor lacked national importance despite its substantial merit; consulting services to individual clients lack the broad prospective impact required.

A researcher and assistant professor sought NIW for EB-2 under Dhanasar. The AAO agreed the proposed endeavor had substantial merit and national importance but concluded the petitioner was not well-positioned to advance it, lacking demonstrated influence, institutional support, or feasible funding for research plans.

A crop pathologist self-petitioner claimed extraordinary ability based on seven criteria. The AAO affirmed only scholarly articles as met, withdrew the USCIS finding on judging, and rejected published materials. With only one criterion met, the petitioner fell short of the three-criterion threshold and was ineligible; final merits analysis was not reached.

Senior security researcher seeks NIW for cybersecurity innovations. AAO dismissed finding proposed endeavor lacks national importance; work benefits only specific employers and clients without broader field or national security implications.

Cybersecurity engineer employed as head of detection engineering sought EB-1A classification. Met initial three criteria: judging, scholarly articles, leading role, and high salary. However, final merits analysis found insufficient sustained national or international acclaim to demonstrate extraordinary ability at top percentage level.

A postdoctoral researcher in public health sought NIW for work on drug-resistant diseases. The AAO found the endeavor nationally important but dismissed the appeal because the petitioner lacked a doctoral degree and had not demonstrated concrete plans, progress, or relevant funding to advance the work.

Chief technology officer sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Met only two of ten evidentiary criteria after multiple appeals. AAO dismissed motion to reopen and reconsider, finding petitioner failed to establish three required criteria and did not identify legal errors in prior decisions.

A cultural diplomacy expert with master's degrees in public administration and peace studies seeks extraordinary ability classification. The AAO found the petitioner submitted minimal or no credible evidence for any criterion, relying on unsupported assertions rather than documentation. Appeal dismissed.

Electrical engineer with master's and doctoral degrees from Iran proposing renewable energy research. AAO held petitioner satisfied only two of ten criteria (judging, scholarly articles); failed to establish original contributions of major significance; appeal dismissed.

Product manager sought EB-1A classification. Did not receive major internationally recognized award and failed to satisfy three alternate criteria: awards lacked national recognition, contributions not shown original or major, leading role evidence insufficient.

Nurse with advanced degree initially proposing primary care work in underserved Florida areas, later proposing occupational health consulting company. AAO held both endeavors lack national importance under Dhanasar; healthcare field importance alone insufficient for specific endeavor-level impact.

Operations and procurement analyst from Venezuela with bachelor's degree seeks EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. AAO affirmed denial because petitioner failed to demonstrate major award and satisfied none of three required evidentiary criteria; lacks sustained acclaim.