Published AAO appeal decisions

Regulatory affairs manager in business seeks EB-1A. Petitioner claimed multiple criteria including awards, publications, judging, and high salary. AAO found at least three criteria met but concluded totality of evidence does not establish sustained national or international acclaim or top-tier status in the field.

A software engineer with master's degree in computer science seeks EB-2 national interest waiver for designing novel algorithms in private cloud storage. The AAO dismissed, finding the proposed endeavor lacked demonstrated national importance beyond the employer's specific needs.

A finance controller and startup CEO with an O-1 visa claimed EB-1A status. AAO found he failed to establish three criteria: membership in qualifying associations, high salary compared to field peers, and therefore fell below the threshold, dismissing the petition without reaching final merits.

Construction engineer and sustainability specialist with 22 years experience sought EB-2 NIW. Service center approved advanced degree qualification but denied NIW. AAO dismissed because proposed endeavor lacks national importance despite substantial merit; petitioner did not show prospective national impact beyond local scope or sufficient economic benefit commensurate with national importance.

Former cricket player who competed internationally 2001-2007 sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Met three of ten initial criteria but the AAO dismissed the appeal because the totality of evidence did not establish sustained national or international acclaim placing him among the very top of his field.

Employer sought national interest waiver for beneficiary as assistant professor of otolaryngology-head and neck surgery. AAO found beneficiary met EB-2 advanced degree requirement but proposed endeavor lacked adequate evidence of national importance beyond employer and local patients, failing the first Dhanasar prong.

Software test automation engineer met all seven claimed initial criteria. However, AAO affirmed denial at final merits stage, finding evidence concentrated in 2024-2025 lacks sustained national or international acclaim. Work influence confined within company; does not demonstrate top-tier field standing.

Port manager with advanced degree sought national interest waiver of job offer requirement. AAO agreed endeavor had substantial merit but lacked national importance. Petitioner failed to establish specific work would impact field, industry, or economy beyond company operations. Remaining Dhanasar prongs reserved.

A Brazilian healthcare specialist with advanced degree seeks NIW for EB-2, proposing to develop audit systems and management frameworks. The AAO dismissed because petitioner failed to establish the underlying EB-2 classification and did not demonstrate national importance of the specific proposed endeavor.

Pilot self-petitioner sought NIW under EB-2 as advanced degree professional. AAO dismissed appeal, finding initial endeavor as airline transport pilot lacked national importance, and petitioner materially changed endeavor in response to RFE without establishing broader field implications.

CEO seeking NIW for eco-friendly manufacturing startup claimed national importance of his business venture. AAO held the endeavor lacks broader field-level impact, representing only routine company-specific benefit insufficient for NIW, distinguishing meaningful national importance from merely important work.

An economist sought extraordinary ability classification on reopened appeal after a finding that he submitted an altered paper naming him sole author. The AAO upheld the willful misrepresentation finding, concluded the evidentiary criteria and top-of-field standing were not shown, and dismissed the appeal without reaching continued work in the field.

Educational technology researcher claimed NIW for health literacy research advancing competency-based learning. AAO held proposed endeavor lacks demonstrated national importance despite university adoption at one institution, and applicant failed to show recent productivity or sustained research continuation warranting waiver.

A business process reengineering consultant sought a national interest waiver under the second preference category. After several earlier denials and dismissals, the petitioner filed a motion to reconsider. The AAO dismissed it because no incorrect application of law or policy was shown, and the arguments were repetitive or could have been raised earlier.

Tourism consultant and entrepreneur sought EB-2 national interest waiver. AAO dismissed motion to reconsider, finding petitioner did not overcome the most recent adverse decision and merely reargued prior issues. Motion scope was limited to the latest decision only, and petitioner did not demonstrate incorrect application of law.

A tourism specialist and entrepreneur self-petitioned for EB-1A extraordinary ability. The AAO affirmed that the petitioner met fewer than three evidentiary criteria and did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim required for extraordinary ability classification.

A business legal consultant appealed AAO dismissal on motion to reconsider, challenging criterion findings. The AAO dismissed the motion, holding petitioner met judging and scholarly articles criteria but failed final merits analysis, lacking sustained acclaim and elite field standing. Petitioner did not adequately address the dispositive final merits determination.

Mechanical engineer employed in advanced driver assistance systems sought national interest waiver. AAO held proposed endeavor lacked sufficient concrete examples of broad impact and petitioner did not establish ownership of intellectual property or impact beyond specific employer, failing the substantial merit and national importance prong.

Tattoo artist with black-and-gray specialization sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Met four initial criteria including published material, judging, exhibitions, and remuneration. AAO found totality of evidence insufficient for sustained national or international acclaim required for small percentage at top of field. Appeal dismissed.

A materials engineering researcher proposed computational modeling research to improve additive manufacturing processes and sought a national interest waiver. The AAO agreed the endeavor has substantial merit but held national importance was not shown, since the evidence did not demonstrate prospective impact. It dismissed the appeal and reserved the remaining prongs.

An entrepreneur sought EB-1A classification based on five claimed criteria. The AAO affirmed SCOPS findings that he met judging and leading role criteria but rejected published material due to missing author attribution, original contributions as lacking major significance, and high salary due to insufficient documentation. Appeal dismissed.

Industrial machinery mechanic sought EB-2 exceptional ability classification with national interest waiver. AAO found petitioner met only two of six criteria and lacked exceptional ability: professional identity card did not constitute recognized profession license; salary evidence insufficient; professional association membership unsubstantiated; achievement recognition undemonstrated. Appeal dismissed.

Business management researcher self-petitioned for EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Claimed six criteria; AAO found four met but reversed SCOPS on two criteria (membership, published material), concluding threshold requirements unmet. Final merits determination reserved because initial evidence requirements not satisfied.

Oil and gas completions specialist seeks NIW under EB-2 with advanced degree. Proposed AI-enabled endeavor aligned with federal supply-chain policies. AAO dismissed appeal, finding substantial merit but no demonstrated national importance; company-specific savings lack broader industry implications required by Dhanasar.

A digital marketing specialist sought extraordinary ability classification. The service center found two criteria met; on appeal the petitioner claimed four more. The AAO found the threshold of three criteria satisfied but dismissed the appeal because the evidence did not show sustained acclaim or top-of-field standing.