Published AAO appeal decisions

Taekwondo athlete and coach claiming NIW under EB-2. Petitioner asserted exceptional ability under multiple criteria; Director found only one met. On appeal, insufficient arguments and evidence to overcome exceptional ability finding. NIW claim failed at first Dhanasar prong: proposed endeavor lacks national importance. Appeal dismissed.

A dentist and orthodontist with MBA sought NIW for EB-2. AAO dismissed because petitioner lacked a U.S. DDS/DMD or foreign equivalent degree required by regulation, and proposed dental practice lacks national importance under Dhanasar.

Gastroenterologist sought national interest waiver for EB-2 classification. Petitioner established substantial merit and national importance of proposed research endeavor but failed to demonstrate he was well positioned to advance it through sufficient record of success, impact, or progress. Appeal dismissed.

A country club filed a motion to reopen and reconsider an O-1A denial for a tennis director. The AAO dismissed both motions for failure to meet procedural requirements: the motion lacked required statement about prior judicial proceedings and did not present proper cause, making merits review unnecessary.

Industrial chemist seeking NIW for research on chemical applications. First prong met but second prong failed because patent and publications, though recognized, did not demonstrate sufficient industry impact or record of success needed to show petitioner well positioned to advance research endeavor.

Education specialist sought national interest waiver for EB-2 classification. AAO dismissed appeal, finding the proposed endeavor of professionalizing teachers lacked sufficient specificity and documentation to meet the first prong of Dhanasar framework requiring substantial merit and national importance. AAO also found willful material misrepresentation regarding professional research experience.

An electrical engineer sought extraordinary ability classification after the service center revoked an earlier approval. On appeal, the petitioner submitted an affidavit and letter about the lengthy procedural history and stress, but no substantive response to the revocation grounds. The AAO summarily dismissed the appeal for failing to identify any specific error of law or fact.

Senior application engineer and researcher with advanced degree in electrical engineering sought NIW for EB-2. AAO found beneficiary qualified for EB-2 but dismissed appeal because proposed endeavor lacked sufficient national importance beyond the specific employer.

An ICT consultant and professor sought NIW under EB-2. The AAO found the proposed endeavor lacked national importance, as the regulatory record did not show impact beyond individual clients and students; benefits did not rise to substantial positive economic effects. Appeal dismissed.

A dentist trained in Brazil sought EB-2 classification as an advanced degree professional with a national interest waiver. The AAO withdrew the finding that the foreign degree was equivalent to a US doctorate and found the petitioner not well positioned to advance the endeavor because he lacked US licensure and was working as a dental assistant. Worker shortage alone does not support a waiver.

Entrepreneur founder of retail shops seeking NIW as exceptional ability business person. Claimed substantial merit and national importance of business operations and mentorship program. AAO held first Dhanasar prong not met because proposed endeavor lacks evidence of national importance; retail shops lack scale and economic significance to qualify.

A software developer sought EB-2 classification as an individual of exceptional ability with a national interest waiver. The AAO found the petitioner satisfied only two of the six exceptional ability criteria and lacked progressive post-baccalaureate experience. Because the underlying EB-2 qualification was not established, the national interest waiver claim became moot and was not analyzed.

IT project manager sought NIW based on EB-2 advanced degree. AAO found she qualified for underlying EB-2 but dismissed NIW appeal because her proposed IT consulting and research tool development lacked evidence of national importance or broader field impact beyond her employers and clients.

A neurosurgeon and researcher seeking NIW claimed he would conduct research and provide patient care. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding his proposed endeavor lacked specificity and failed to demonstrate national importance. His future work would not impact the neurological field broadly.

Human resources specialist with thirty years experience sought NIW for EB-2 classification. Proposed work in global mobility and personnel management. AAO found endeavor of substantial merit but lacked national importance; work for single employer lacks broader field implications. Second and third prongs not reached.

A gymnastics coach sought EB-2 exceptional ability classification with a national interest waiver. The AAO affirmed that while the coach qualified for EB-2 and was well positioned to advance the endeavor, the proposed coaching lacked national importance because its impact was limited to specific gymnasts and a local setting rather than affecting the gymnastics field broadly.

An entrepreneur and global marketing specialist sought EB-2 NIW for expanding a digital signage business in North Carolina. The AAO affirmed the director's finding that while the endeavor has substantial merit, the petitioner failed to demonstrate national importance under Dhanasar's first prong. Business projections were unsupported and lacked evidence of broader field impact.

Physical therapist sought NIW for EB-2 classification. Proposed clinical work treating patients with functional and cardiorespiratory disorders in healthcare facility. AAO disagreed with director on identifying proposed endeavor but affirmed no national importance shown; benefits confined to individual patients, lacking broader field implications. Matter remanded.

Self-petitioning carpet weaver sought EB-2 exceptional ability classification with national interest waiver. Service center found petitioner qualified as individual of exceptional ability. AAO reversed, finding petitioner does not qualify for underlying EB-2 classification; therefore dismissed appeal without reaching Dhanasar waiver analysis.

Senior electrical engineer seeking EB-2 with national interest waiver. Petitioner qualified for EB-2 as advanced degree professional but failed NIW first prong: proposed endeavor in wireless communication and device development lacked demonstrated national importance beyond company-specific applications.

Chemical engineer sought EB-2 exceptional ability with NIW. Proposed continuation of work on solid waste and water quality treatment. AAO dismissed appeal, finding petitioner failed to qualify for underlying EB-2 exceptional ability classification by meeting fewer than three regulatory criteria and failed first Dhanasar prong on national importance.

Medical epidemiologist sought EB-2 advanced degree with NIW to advance public health preparedness and emergency response focusing on vaccine preventable diseases. AAO dismissed appeal, finding petitioner met first Dhanasar prong but failed second prong; evidence submitted post-filing was inadmissible, and petitioner did not rebut director's finding of insufficient positioning.

Chemist self-petitioner sought national interest waiver for EB-2 exceptional ability in drug development. AAO dismissed appeal because petitioner failed to sufficiently describe her specific proposed future work, preventing analysis of substantial merit, national importance, or positioning.

Psychiatric nurse practitioner sought EB-2 national interest waiver. AAO found he qualified for advanced degree classification but dismissed the NIW appeal because the proposed endeavor lacked national importance, affecting only individual patients rather than the field broadly.

A financial analyst sought an EB-2 classification with a national interest waiver, relying on academic records, an education evaluation and an employer letter to claim advanced degree status. The AAO dismissed the appeal because the petitioner did not establish the underlying advanced degree qualification, so the waiver analysis was not reached.