Published AAO appeal decisions

Molecular biologist claims extraordinary ability through NIH grant, recommendation letters, and publications in HIV and cancer research. AAO found valuable contributions insufficient to demonstrate sustained acclaim placing her at field's very top.

Professional soccer player and coach sought extraordinary ability classification. Petitioner claimed awards, membership, and published material. AAO found club-level awards not nationally or internationally recognized, membership participation as player irrelevant to coaching acclaim, and published articles lacked sustained acclaim documentation in major media.

Rhythmic gymnastics coach sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Petitioner claimed three criteria via Master of Sport designation, judging, and leading role in team success. AAO found insufficient evidence of sustained national or international acclaim as coach and dismissed the appeal.

A self-represented practitioner of alternative medicine sought extraordinary ability classification. The director found sustained acclaim not established. On appeal the petitioner offered only a general statement about helping people's health, with no argument or evidence on the regulatory criteria, so the AAO summarily dismissed the appeal without analyzing any criterion.

A self-represented petitioner, whose occupation is not stated in the decision, sought extraordinary ability classification and was denied for lacking sustained acclaim. The appeal came with no arguments or evidence on the regulatory criteria. The appeal was summarily dismissed because it did not identify any specific error in the denial.

Ballroom dancesport competitor sought EB-1A extraordinary ability. Petitioner submitted evidence addressing three criteria: awards, association membership, and published media. AAO found awards from youth events, unqualified association membership, and outdated media coverage insufficient to establish sustained national or international acclaim.

Self-petitioner sought classification for beneficiary as extraordinary ability alien in asphalt sealing supervision. AAO dismissed appeal because petition contained no supporting evidence for any regulatory criterion and attempted impermissible amendment on appeal to different classification.

A self-represented petitioner, whose occupation is not stated in the decision, sought extraordinary ability classification and was denied for lacking sustained acclaim. The appeal offered only a general claim of reputation, with no brief or evidence on the criteria. The appeal was summarily dismissed for failing to identify any specific error.

A self-represented petitioner, whose occupation is not stated in the decision, sought extraordinary ability classification and was denied for lacking sustained acclaim. The appeal offered only a general assertion of recognized reputation and a request for reconsideration, with no evidence. The appeal was summarily dismissed for not identifying any specific error.

Self-petitioner, handicapped marathon athlete, claimed extraordinary ability in athletics. AAO affirmed denial because petitioner failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim through regulatory criteria, had only one award from 1986, and did not establish intent to work as athlete in United States.

Professional in unspecified field claimed extraordinary ability based on distinguished reputation. Petitioner submitted no brief, arguments, or evidence addressing regulatory criteria and declined to submit separate evidence. AAO summarily dismissed appeal for failure to identify erroneous conclusions or factual statements.

Tile and stone fabricator claimed extraordinary ability. Petitioner submitted minimal evidence including blank pay stub and general statement of job duties. AAO found no documentation satisfying any of ten criteria and rejected claim of national or international acclaim at top field level.

Folk artist petitioner claimed extraordinary ability. Petitioner failed to submit evidence addressing regulatory criteria and did not respond adequately to director's request for documentation. AAO summarily dismissed appeal for lack of substantive arguments and insufficient evidence.

Professional in unspecified field claimed extraordinary ability with recognized reputation. Petitioner submitted no brief, arguments, or additional evidence on appeal and declined separate submission. AAO summarily dismissed for failure to identify erroneous conclusions or present substantive arguments.

Scientist claimed EB-1A status as computational scientist based on patents, encyclopedia entries, and peer review work. AAO dismissed, finding awards academic only, memberships non-exclusive, self-published coverage inadequate, and contributions lacking major significance to demonstrate sustained national acclaim.

Arm wrestling professional athlete sought EB-1A classification. AAO dismissed appeal, finding awards lacked national or international recognition, no major media coverage, and comparable evidence insufficient. Petitioner failed to meet three regulatory criteria.

Statistician sought EB-1A classification based on dissertation prize, professional memberships, and citation record. AAO dismissed, finding academic awards limited to student competition, memberships non-exclusive, citations alone insufficient for three criteria, and overall evidence failing to demonstrate sustained national acclaim.

Business intelligence systems analyst and developer sought extraordinary ability classification. Petitioner claimed judging, original contributions, and leading role. AAO found judging limited to employment duties, recommendation letters insufficient to show major field significance beyond acquaintances, and no documentary evidence of organizational role or reputation.

Acrobatic performer claimed EB-1A extraordinary ability. Beneficiary met two of ten criteria including original contributions to knockabout style. AAO found evidence of talent and influence but insufficient to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim at very top of acrobatic field. Appeal dismissed.

Self-petitioner sought EB-1A classification based on youth awards and association membership. AAO dismissed appeal, finding awards limited to local recognition, membership criteria unmet, and no published material in major media. Overall evidence insufficient to show sustained acclaim.

Market research analyst claimed EB-1A extraordinary ability in sciences or business. Petitioner submitted awards, memberships, and evaluation responsibilities but met no criteria. AAO found successful professional in Romania and valued employee in California but insufficient evidence of sustained national or international acclaim. Appeal dismissed.

Senior software engineer in computer vision sought EB-1A extraordinary ability. Petition initially approved but revoked. AAO affirmed revocation finding petitioner met no criteria. Evidence showed talent but insufficient to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim at very top of field. Appeal dismissed.

A gymnastics coach claiming extraordinary ability based on alleged Olympic participation and coaching accomplishments. The AAO found no corroboration of Olympic participation, insufficient recognition of awards, inadequate published material documentation, and letters of support insufficient to demonstrate sustained national acclaim at the top of the field.

Musician and musical director filed EB-1A petition claiming extraordinary ability. Petitioner met only two of ten required criteria. AAO found regional success and upward career trajectory but insufficient evidence of sustained national or international acclaim at very top of field. Appeal dismissed.

A pharmacokinetics reviewer at the FDA seeking extraordinary ability classification based on awards, membership, published material, peer review, and leadership roles. The AAO found only published work met criteria; other evidence was insufficient to establish sustained national acclaim warranting extraordinary ability classification.