Published AAO appeal decisions

Mechanical engineer employed by company seeks national interest waiver for EB-2 classification. Petitioner claimed his mechanical engineering work for automotive manufacturers would have national importance. AAO dismissed appeal, finding insufficient evidence that the specific proposed endeavor has national importance or substantial economic effects, failing the first Dhanasar prong.

Business owner entrepreneur seeking national interest waiver to waive job offer requirement for EB-2 classification. Claimed endeavor in business administration had substantial merit and petitioner was well positioned to advance it, but proposed work lacked evidence of national importance, particularly regarding U.S. worker employment potential. Appeal dismissed.

Environmental and chemical/petroleum engineer self-petitioner claimed extraordinary ability based on scholarly articles, judging, and original contributions of major significance. AAO found only two criteria met; original contributions lacked evidence of major significance or widespread impact. Appeal dismissed as petitioner failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim required for extraordinary ability classification.

Self-petitioner and business owner in logistics and supply chain management. Established advanced degree eligibility but sought national interest waiver. AAO dismissed, finding proposed business endeavor, though meritorious, lacks national importance as required by first Dhanasar prong; no broader field or substantial economic impact demonstrated.

A cardiologist and director seeking NIW under EB-2 claimed substantial merit and national importance for clinical work, teaching, and leadership. AAO found substantial merit but not national importance; clinical impact limited to individual workplace. Petitioner also failed to demonstrate being well positioned to advance endeavor.

An engineer employed at a semiconductor tool manufacturer seeks a national interest waiver for EB-2 classification. He proposed to continue research and development of proprietary tools in his specialized field. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding his work lacks national importance because evidence does not show broader implications beyond his employer's operations or demonstrate significant potential to employ U.S. workers.

Media management expert sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Claimed judging, leading role, salary, and original contributions criteria. AAO found only judging criterion met; one criterion insufficient. Record lacks evidence of sustained national or international acclaim required for extraordinary ability classification.

Business manager with advanced degree sought national interest waiver for EB-2 claiming endeavor to improve U.S. business structures and profitability. AAO found he was well positioned to advance but proposed endeavor lacked sufficient national importance specificity, failing first Dhanasar prong and rendering waiver ineligible.

Television producer sought EB-1A classification. Met three initial criteria: published material, judging, and scholarly articles. AAO found initial requirements satisfied but rejected final merits, concluding limited publication record and single judging instance insufficient to demonstrate sustained acclaim or elite status. Appeal dismissed.

Mechanical engineer with Ph.D. seeking EB-2 national interest waiver. Petitioner held advanced degree but failed to establish substantial merit and national importance of proposed endeavor under Dhanasar framework. AAO dismissed because petitioner did not differentiate proposed research from past work or demonstrate prospective impact.

A postdoctoral environmental chemistry researcher satisfied three criteria: judging, original contributions, and scholarly articles. However, on final merits analysis, the AAO found the record lacked evidence of sustained acclaim, exceptional demand, or consistent high citations required for extraordinary ability.

Investment firm petitioned for investment banking executive beneficiary claiming six criteria. AAO found at most one criterion met and rejected the director's published material finding, concluding petitioner failed to establish extraordinary ability or the three-criterion threshold.

Volleyball coach meets initial award criterion but fails to establish final merits. AAO found petitioner, though with experience on national teams, lacks sustained national or international acclaim and remains at intermediate career stage rather than top of field.

A nonprofit executive sought EB-2 exceptional ability and national interest waiver. The AAO affirmed that he did not meet exceptional ability criteria. On NIW review under Dhanasar, the decision found the first prong failed because his proposed nonprofit management work lacked sufficient detail to demonstrate national importance beyond organizational level activities.

A professional violist sought extraordinary ability classification, claiming four evidentiary criteria. The service center accepted two, and on appeal he argued only an additional awards criterion. The AAO found the prize lacked shown recognition, so three criteria were not met, and it advised the aggregate record also showed insufficient acclaim.

Sports agent petitioned for coach advisor seeking extraordinary ability classification. The AAO found beneficiary met three initial criteria through prior national team membership and championship. However, the totality of evidence failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or placement at the top of coaching field.

A video journalist sought extraordinary ability classification on his own behalf, claiming several evidentiary criteria. The AAO agreed that the awards and judging criteria were met but found membership, published material, exhibitions and leading role unmet. Overall, the evidence did not show sustained acclaim, so the appeal was dismissed.

An engineer claimed six evidentiary criteria for extraordinary ability classification. The AAO found the published material articles were about the employer or industry, not the petitioner's work, and lacked formal evidence of judging designation. The record failed to establish sustained national or international acclaim required for the classification.

A dental surgeon with advanced degree sought EB-2 classification and national interest waiver. While qualified as advanced degree professional, the AAO agreed with the Director that the proposed endeavor lacked national importance under the first Dhanasar prong because the offered administrative position was unrelated to dental research and expansion plans lacked documented national economic impact.

A physician seeking EB-2 classification with NIW qualification proposed medical research combined with clinical practice. The AAO dismissed because the petitioner failed the first Dhanasar prong: the proposed endeavor lacked sufficient national importance, with vague research intentions and minimal documentation insufficient to distinguish from ordinary practice.

Physical therapist entrepreneur qualified for advanced degree classification but sought national interest waiver. AAO found proposed endeavor lacked national importance; projected employment of 10-14 workers and local benefits insufficient; shortage in field does not establish national importance.

Agricultural business director with advanced degree sought EB-2 classification with national interest waiver. Service center qualified petitioner for advanced degree but denied waiver. Petitioner argued proposed endeavor part of sustainable farming initiative with national importance. AAO found proposed business lacked national importance under Dhanasar first prong and dismissed appeal.

An orchestral musician seeks extraordinary ability classification. She claims five criteria including awards, membership, judging, exhibitions, and leading role. AAO found only leading role met; insufficient criteria. Petitioner lacks demonstrated sustained national or international acclaim required for extraordinary ability.

A mechanical engineer with advanced degree sought NIW for HVAC engineering work. The AAO affirmed denial because her proposed work lacked sufficient national importance under Dhanasar's first prong; it would not impact the field broadly beyond her employer and clients.