Published AAO appeal decisions

Architect sought NIW for EB-2 advanced degree classification for proposed architectural and design projects. AAO held petitioner failed to establish specific consistent proposed endeavor and did not demonstrate national importance beyond general field significance, thus failing Dhanasar first prong.

Individual initially claimed entrepreneur status via luxury car service; later asserted agriculture field. AAO found occupational field description inconsistent and insufficient; could not determine exceptional ability level. Failed to meet EB-2 threshold; NIW analysis declined as issue dispositive.

Drill operator sought EB-2 exceptional ability classification and NIW. AAO affirmed denial because petitioner failed to satisfy three of six exceptional ability criteria under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(ii); decision reserved opinion on Dhanasar NIW analysis.

A television host sought extraordinary ability classification, claiming seven criteria on appeal. The Director had accepted only judging. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding awards, published material and original contributions unproven, leaving the petitioner short of three criteria, and noting that sustained acclaim and top-of-field standing were not shown.

A financial executive sought a national interest waiver for an EB-2 petition. Although the director found the petitioner qualified as advanced degree professional and the endeavor had substantial merit, the AAO affirmed denial, finding the proposed work lacks national importance because it would not impact the finance industry beyond the employer.

An international athlete sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification based on a one-time major award. The AAO found his European Tour Grand Final victory was not a major internationally recognized award qualifying as one-time achievement and dismissed the appeal without reaching final merits analysis.

Training and development manager sought EB-2 with national interest waiver. Petitioner did not establish underlying EB-2 eligibility as advanced degree professional or exceptional ability; failed to meet at least three of six regulatory criteria. AAO dismissed appeal.

A martial arts athlete self-petitioner sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The AAO dismissed, finding the petitioner failed to meet three of ten evidentiary criteria. Awards lacked national/international recognition outside one association; membership status unsubstantiated; published material insufficient.

An accountant sought EB-2 classification as an advanced degree professional or exceptional ability individual, with a national interest waiver. The AAO dismissed the appeal because the occupation and endeavor were not sufficiently identified and exceptional ability was not shown, then declined to reach the waiver. This is not a Dhanasar waiver decision.

A skydiving center sought to employ a beneficiary as an O-1A nonimmigrant skydiving instructor. The beneficiary met only the awards criterion but failed to establish at least three required criteria overall; the appeal was dismissed because the petitioner could not satisfy the initial evidentiary threshold.

An advanced degree holder proposing business consulting and COVID-related kiosk services sought national interest waiver. The AAO found the petitioner impermissibly changed the substantive nature of his endeavor after filing and failed to show prospective impact rising to national importance level.

Business management consultant sought national interest waiver claiming endeavor of operational supervision and continuous improvement techniques. AAO held proposed endeavor lacked national importance, finding past company results insufficient to establish broad impact and applicant's qualifications relevant only to subsequent prong. Appeal dismissed.

Tennis coach seeking EB-2 NIW proposed operating a tennis academy. AAO held the specific endeavor lacks national importance despite assertions of tennis benefits and a product innovation; the record does not demonstrate national or global implications within the field or substantial positive economic effects beyond the business.

Chemist and dietary supplement manufacturer claiming extraordinary ability. Petitioner met only one criterion (scholarly articles published). Did not establish major significance of contributions; compounds lacked field-wide adoption; high remuneration claim uncorroborated. Record showed lack of sustained international acclaim or top-tier recognition required for extraordinary ability.

A military officer with advanced degree in special and tactical operations seeks EB-2 NIW. The petitioner proposed creating a security consulting company. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding the endeavor fails to demonstrate national importance or substantial economic effects under Dhanasar.

A physical therapist proposing to operate a business providing physical therapy and Pilates services, with potential cross-border consulting. AAO held that the petitioner failed the first prong by lacking sufficient evidence that the business would impact healthcare broadly or generate substantial economic effects at national level.

Operations professional sought EB-2 exceptional ability and national interest waiver. AAO found he met the educational credential criterion but not the salary criterion for exceptional ability. Because he failed the underlying EB-2 threshold, the national interest waiver analysis was not pursued.

A rhythmic gymnast sought extraordinary ability classification under EB-1A. She claimed three criteria: lesser awards, published material, and original contributions. The AAO affirmed denial, finding she did not meet any criterion because her awards lacked documented national or international recognition, her media coverage was insufficient, and she presented no evidence of original contributions of major significance.

A self-petitioner hospitality entrepreneur sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The AAO found the petitioner met two of ten criteria (published material and judging). The decision dismissed the appeal because the petitioner failed to establish the required three criteria and lacked sustained national or international acclaim outside his employment contexts.

Tattoo artist claimed five criteria for extraordinary ability classification. Met two initial evidentiary criteria but failed three additional ones: awards lacked national significance, original contributions not demonstrated, and critical role unsubstantiated. AAO affirmed dismissal; evidence did not establish sustained national or international acclaim.

A dental medical scientist sought EB-2 classification with national interest waiver. AAO affirmed denial, finding the petitioner met the underlying advanced degree requirement but failed to establish a consistent, clearly defined proposed endeavor with substantial merit and national importance, and was not well positioned to advance the work due to lack of U.S. dental practice qualification.

Martial arts competitor and coach sought EB-1A extraordinary ability. Satisfied awards and judging criteria only. AAO rejected membership claim lacking expert recognition documentation and published material claim lacking proper attribution and venue. Failed to meet three-criterion threshold or demonstrate top-of-field extraordinary ability.

Doctoral student seeking EB-1A classification claimed judging and original contribution criteria. AAO dismissed motions to reopen and reconsider, affirming that participation in project evaluation and conference presentations did not satisfy evidentiary requirements for extraordinary ability.

Computer engineer claimed EB-2 advanced degree or exceptional ability and national interest waiver. AAO held petitioner did not establish advanced degree eligibility, met only one of six exceptional ability criteria, and thus failed to establish first prong of Dhanasar framework, making waiver analysis unnecessary.