Published AAO appeal decisions

Self-petitioner sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification but provided only general statement of qualified ability without evidence. Appeal was summarily dismissed because petitioner failed to identify erroneous conclusions or submit arguments addressing regulatory criteria.

A self-petitioner sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The appeal was summarily dismissed because the petitioner failed to submit arguments or evidence addressing the regulatory criteria, merely stating he had distinguished reputation and requesting reconsideration without specifics.

Self-petitioner sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The AAO summarily dismissed the appeal because the petitioner failed to submit arguments, evidence, or address the director's reasons for denial, as required by regulation.

Self-represented alien sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification but appealed the denial without substantive arguments or new evidence. AAO summarily dismissed because petitioner failed to identify erroneous conclusions or statements of fact.

A dance studio employer petitions for EB-1A classification of a beneficiary as extraordinary ability in the arts. The beneficiary claimed awards, published material, and leading role as dancer and coach. The AAO affirmed dismissal because the beneficiary met no criteria and showed insufficient sustained national or international acclaim at the very top level.

Former rhythmic gymnast seeking EB-1A as coach. Petitioner claimed awards and published materials criteria. AAO held insufficient evidence of sustained acclaim as coach rather than retired athlete; coaching achievements not documented at national or international level.

Self-represented petitioner seeking EB-1A classification with no field identified. Petitioner submitted conclusory statement of confidence without arguments or evidence. AAO summarily dismissed appeal for failure to address regulatory criteria or identify erroneous conclusions.

Self-represented petitioner, editor and writer of local chronicles in China with twenty-year career. Claimed extraordinary ability through awards, scholarly articles, and original contributions. AAO dismissed appeal, finding one national award and single article recognition insufficient, uncertified translations of recommendation letters inadmissible, and no evidence of sustained acclaim or intent to continue work in United States.

A poet seeks EB-1A as an alien of extraordinary ability in the arts. The petitioner claimed awards, membership, published material, and scholarly articles. The AAO affirmed dismissal because the petitioner failed to establish any criterion and showed only talent, not sustained national or international acclaim at the very top level.

A research scientist claims EB-1A extraordinary ability in the sciences. The petitioner asserted awards, membership, publications, original contributions, scholarly articles, leading role, and salary criteria. The AAO affirmed denial because none demonstrated the sustained national or international acclaim required to show she reached the very top of her field.

A self-represented petitioner, whose occupation is not stated in the excerpt, sought extraordinary ability classification. The director found sustained acclaim not established. The appeal was summarily dismissed because the petitioner submitted no arguments or evidence identifying any error in the denial and addressed none of the regulatory criteria.

Counsel represented postdoctoral biomedical researcher in sciences. Petitioner met two criteria: original contributions via National Academy opinions and scholarly articles through sustained publication. AAO dismissed appeal, finding two criteria insufficient, no evidence of distinguished performance meriting small percentage at field top.

Counsel represented Chinese Peking Opera actor claiming extraordinary ability. Failed to meet three required criteria: awards lacked official documentation, membership was local-level only, and critical role unproven. Additionally, no evidence of continued work in expertise area or prospective employment plans required by regulation.

A power lifter from Uruguay seeks EB-1A classification as a personal trainer. The petitioner claimed awards, membership, published material, judging, and leading role. The AAO affirmed dismissal because the petitioner met none of the three criteria required and showed no sustained national or international acclaim in the claimed field.

Oil painter from China sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification based on exhibition awards, publication, judging role, and sales. AAO dismissed appeal, finding awards and exhibitions lacked sustained national acclaim, documentation was deficient, and evidence did not show sustained recognition at the very top of the field.

Athlete seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Director found petitioner lacked sustained national or international acclaim. Counsel failed to submit detailed brief within six months or identify specific legal or factual errors, resulting in summary dismissal of appeal.

IT educator and consultant seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability. Petitioner submitted certificates, CompTIA membership, articles, recommendation letters, and commercial success evidence. AAO found none met regulatory criteria; evidence demonstrated commendable local contributions but no sustained national or international acclaim at top of field.

Taekwondo instructor beneficiary sought O-1A nonimmigrant visa for extraordinary ability in athletics. Petitioner claimed three criteria: awards, association membership, and judging experience. AAO dismissed, finding awards were regional not national, membership claim unsubstantiated, and judging criterion unmet; fewer than three criteria satisfied.

Cook sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Petitioner claimed awards, membership, judging experience, and exhibitions. AAO found early awards lacked sustained acclaim, membership and judging criteria not met, and exhibitions not demonstrated at exclusive national venues. Record also lacked evidence of intent to continue work in United States.

Performing artist seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Petitioner submitted awards, association memberships, and performance evidence. AAO found no criteria met; awards lacked national documentation, memberships did not show outstanding achievement, performances were not centerpiece of major productions, and no evidence of intent to continue work in United States.

A self-represented petitioner, whose occupation is not described in the excerpt, sought extraordinary ability classification after the director found no sustained acclaim. On appeal she only asserted a good reputation and requested reconsideration. The appeal was summarily dismissed because it identified no specific legal or factual error and offered no new evidence.

CEO claiming extraordinary ability in business submitted evidence of local company rankings, association membership, software development, and executive compensation. AAO found only one criterion met, concluding the applicant showed talent but lacked sustained national or international acclaim required for top-tier classification.

A Chinese acrobat claiming extraordinary ability in athletics and arts submitted evidence of local awards, association membership, and performances. AAO found no criterion met, determining awards lacked national or international recognition and membership did not require outstanding achievement.

Physicist specializing in semiconductor laser design and fabrication claimed extraordinary ability through awards and fellowships. AAO dismissed appeal, finding the Talented Young Scientists award was a scholarship, not a prize; the JSPS fellowship was research funding, not recognition; and RFBR grants lacked certified translation. Petitioner failed to demonstrate sustained acclaim at field's top level.

An assistant research professor claiming extraordinary ability in sciences submitted evidence of research grants, IEEE membership, and peer review duties. AAO found only one criterion minimally met and dismissed appeal, concluding applicant showed talent but lacked sustained top-tier national or international acclaim.