Published AAO appeal decisions

An MMA fighter competing in amateur and professional competitions claimed four criteria: awards, published material, original contributions, and displayed achievements. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding only one criterion met and concluding the record did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim required for extraordinary ability.

A miniature painter specializing in traditional art sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The AAO dismissed because he satisfied only one of ten criteria: artistic display. Other claimed criteria failed due to insufficient evidence of recognition, and the record did not demonstrate career-level acclaim or top-tier standing in the field.

Electrical power network communications engineer seeks national interest waiver for EB-2 classification to strengthen U.S. power grid. AAO found first prong met but dismissed appeal because petitioner lacked sufficient evidence of being well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor under second Dhanasar prong.

A biomedical researcher sought EB-2 NIW classification under the Dhanasar framework. The AAO found the proposed research had substantial merit and national importance, but concluded the petitioner failed to demonstrate she was well positioned to advance the research, precluding NIW eligibility.

Human resources manager seeking EB-2 NIW to continue HR career with various employers. Petitioner claimed substantial merit and national importance of proposed endeavor. AAO held first Dhanasar prong unmet: HR management lacks national importance and does not impact field or economy broadly; second and third prongs not reached.

A taekwondo school sought to extend O-1A classification for an athletic trainer with prior approvals. The AAO dismissed a motion to reconsider, holding that prior extensions do not bind current decisions and the beneficiary failed to demonstrate three of eight required criteria or a major internationally recognized award.

Research scientist claimed extraordinary ability under EB-1A. Director found three criteria met. AAO reversed on awards and published material, finding insufficient recognition, and concluded evidence did not establish sustained national or international acclaim or top-tier status. Appeal dismissed.

Principal platform engineer in computer science met judging and scholarly articles criteria but failed to establish original contributions of major significance. Did not demonstrate national or international acclaim at top of field. Appeal dismissed.

Ice skating coach and choreographer failed to satisfy any three evidentiary criteria. Evidence did not demonstrate national or international acclaim or placement among top of field; awards were locally recognized.

Actor self-petitioner claimed three criteria for extraordinary ability. AAO found only published material criterion clearly met, withdrew findings on awards and leading role criteria as insufficient, and concluded overall evidence inadequate to demonstrate sustained acclaim or top-tier status.

Postdoctoral molecular biology researcher seeks EB-1A extraordinary ability. Met judging and scholarly articles criteria but failed original contributions criterion. AAO held that citations and journal prestige alone do not demonstrate contributions of major significance in the field.

An agent petitioned to extend O-1A status for a fashion designer beneficiary. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding the beneficiary failed to satisfy initial evidentiary criteria. Two criteria were analyzed and rejected (lead role and commercial success), while two additional criteria claimed on appeal were reserved as unnecessary to the decision.

A software technology company petitioned for its senior creative designer as an extraordinary ability worker, asserting several evidentiary criteria. The AAO found the awards, original contributions and exhibitions criteria unmet, noting the awards belonged to the employer and letters lacked specifics. The evidence did not show sustained acclaim, so the appeal was dismissed.

Badminton coach employed by training center sought O-1A classification. Petitioner claimed extraordinary ability in athletics via membership and published material criteria. AAO found membership requirements did not mandate outstanding achievements and publications were not about the beneficiary.

Art critic and scholar lecturer met only two evidentiary criteria, failing to reach the required three. Published material criterion withdrawn on appeal; original contributions lacked substantiation, and record demonstrated no sustained national or international acclaim.

Jeweler self-employed since 2006 seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. AAO affirmed denial because only one of six claimed evidentiary criteria met. Testimonials insufficient; no evidence of sustained national or international acclaim or placement at very top of field.

Postdoctoral researcher in biomedical science seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability. Met judging and scholarly articles criteria but failed original contributions criterion. AAO dismissed appeal, finding insufficient evidence that research impact rises to major significance level required for extraordinary ability classification.

Business entrepreneur established Texas company, seeks EB-1A. Met scholarly articles criterion only. Claimed membership, published material, and five other criteria. AAO found membership criterion unmet; published material (Russia 24 interview) not established as major media. Only one criterion met; appeal dismissed.

A mechanical engineer claimed extraordinary ability through contributions to aeronautical research and design. The AAO found judging and original contribution criteria met but rejected the claim that contributions had major significance. The petitioner failed the three-criterion threshold and lacked sustained national or international acclaim.

This is an O-2 decision, not O-1A. The decision concerns whether a beneficiary seeking O-2 status as an accompanying individual to an O-1 artist met the requirement of entering solely to assist the O-1. The AAO dismissed the motion, finding the beneficiary worked independently and did not establish the exclusive accompanying purpose required.

Product manager and consultant claimed five EB-1A criteria. Director found only judging criterion met; AAO affirmed. Published material criterion failed due to PR involvement and non-major media outlets. Other claimed criteria not substantively analyzed. Final merits finding against petitioner: record showed successful career progression but not top-tier sustained acclaim required.

A painter with training and international exhibition history claimed five criteria beyond the display criterion. The AAO dismissed the appeal because the petitioner failed to meet at least three total criteria and lacked evidence of sustained national acclaim or membership in top-level field circles.

An oil and gas investment portfolio director claimed six extraordinary ability criteria. The AAO found three criteria met: scholarly articles, leading role, and high salary. However, at final merits the decision held the publication record was too recent and lacked citation evidence of sustained acclaim to establish extraordinary ability.

Self-petitioner chief operating officer seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Met three evidentiary criteria: judging, scholarly articles, and leading critical role. AAO dismissed appeal, finding insufficient sustained national or international acclaim and recognition to demonstrate extraordinary ability at top-tier level.

Physiologist with published research on biological treatments claimed extraordinary ability based on judging, scholarly articles, and original contributions of major significance. AAO found he met judging and articles criteria but not original contributions. Aggregate review showed insufficient sustained acclaim for extraordinary ability classification.