Published AAO appeal decisions

Senior legal advisor with advanced degree sought EB-2 with national interest waiver. Service center denied without analyzing evidence against Dhanasar framework. AAO remanded because service center failed to discuss evidence, identify insufficiencies, or explain conclusions for any of the three prongs required for meaningful appellate review.

Masonry and stone restoration specialist with advanced degree equivalent sought NIW for sustainable historic preservation work. Remanded because SCOPS did not determine if proposed job requires advanced degree professional and failed to explain national importance finding adequately.

An employer petitions for software engineer beneficiary for EB-2 NIW classification. SCOPS erred by analyzing prior work rather than proposed endeavor, and failed to apply STEM field guidance. AAO withdrew SCOPS decision and remanded for proper analysis of all three Dhanasar prongs with appropriate consideration of software engineering innovation.

Computer and information systems manager seeks EB-2 with NIW. Service center denied finding petitioner did not meet exceptional ability despite stating petitioner satisfied three required criteria. AAO found contradictory conclusions and remanded for proper adjudication with request for evidence, noting certification criterion requires clarification.

A solar energy entrepreneur with business degree and twelve years in renewable energy seeks NIW of job requirement. Service center denied underlying EB-2 classification without adequate explanation or RFE. AAO remanded for proper evaluation of whether advanced degree professional status and NIW eligibility were satisfied, finding denial insufficiently reasoned.

Senior engineer in AI research seeking NIW under Dhanasar framework for continued research on safe, autonomous AI systems. Service center's denial lacked complete analysis of evidence, made contradictory statements, and failed to address all arguments. Remanded for proper application of all three Dhanasar prongs with complete evidentiary analysis.

Conceptual artist met three EB-1A criteria (at least one established as published material); SCOPS had rejected membership and scholarships. AAO found published material criterion satisfied, meeting minimum threshold. Matter remanded for final merits determination to evaluate sustained national or international acclaim.

A professional soccer player sought extraordinary ability classification, claiming five criteria. The AAO found awards and published material met, rejected original contributions and high salary, and sustained leading role. With three criteria satisfied, the case was remanded for a final merits analysis of sustained national or international acclaim.

A civil engineer with a master's degree in civil engineering sought EB-2 classification with a national interest waiver. The AAO agreed he qualified as an advanced degree professional but remanded the case because SCOPS made contradictory statements on national importance and provided no analysis for the well-positioned prong, denying him fair notice.

Entrepreneur claimed nine EB-1A criteria but met only two, short of three required. AAO withdrew contradictory SCOPS findings on awards and membership, rejected published material claim, but found petitioner met the threshold. Matter remanded for final merits determination on whether evidence shows sustained acclaim and top-tier status.

Nanotechnology scientist in renewable energy seeking EB-2 with national interest waiver. Petitioner holds advanced degree and established proposed endeavor has substantial merit and national importance through research dissemination plans. AAO reversed SCOPS denial on first prong and remanded for analysis of remaining Dhanasar criteria.

Mechanical engineer with advanced degree sought EB-2 with national interest waiver for semiconductor manufacturing advancement. Service center denied without adequate explanation of Dhanasar prongs analysis. AAO remanded for new decision because service center failed to explain rationale and adequately address petitioner's proposed endeavor rather than employment position.

Tattoo studio petitioned for O-1A classification for tattoo artist beneficiary. AAO determined beneficiary met at least three evidentiary criteria despite SCOPS finding only two. Decision withdrawn and remanded for SCOPS to evaluate totality of evidence and determine whether beneficiary demonstrated sustained national or international acclaim in the arts.

A quantum chemist self-petitioned for EB-1A extraordinary ability. The AAO remanded the case, finding he met three initial criteria including original contributions, and instructed the service center to conduct final merits determination on totality of evidence.

A petitioner sought NIW EB-2 classification but the service center denied it without adequately analyzing the evidence. The AAO remanded, finding the service center did not properly discuss the petitioner's detailed endeavor description, did not evaluate factors in totality for the second prong, and did not adequately weigh considerations for the third prong.

Healthcare company petitioned for registered nurse as EB-3 skilled worker. AAO remanded because the record lacked regulatorily required audited financial statements evidencing ability to pay the proffered wage in the petition priority year 2024, and to clarify which entity would employ the beneficiary.

Machine learning engineer appealed SCOPS denial of EB-1A petition. AAO found petitioner demonstrated original contributions of major significance through highly cited research, meeting the initial evidence threshold. Matter remanded for final merits determination of sustained acclaim.

An advanced manufacturing engineer seeks EB-2 with NIW. The AAO agreed substantial merit was shown but found the petitioner did not adequately demonstrate national importance of the specific endeavor. The decision remanded for the director to reconsider the third prong using STEM-field guidance from policy manual.

Spanish voiceover actor for dubbing and localization sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. AAO remanded because service center failed to address three claimed criteria despite petitioner providing evidence in initial petition and response to RFE, denying fair opportunity to contest on appeal.

A hockey athlete and coach appealed denial of EB-1A petition. The AAO withdrew SCOPS's decision that petitioner failed the judging criterion, finding evidence that she served as head referee. With three criteria met, the AAO remanded for SCOPS to conduct final merits analysis of sustained acclaim and top percentage standing.

A corporate attorney with thirty years of business law experience in U.S.-France trade sought EB-1A classification. The AAO remanded because the Service Center Director failed to fully analyze claimed evidentiary criteria and incorrectly rejected post-filing evidence, depriving the petitioner of complete consideration.

Architect and urban designer claimed extraordinary ability under EB-1A. AAO found three qualifying criteria met (judging, scholarly articles, high salary) and remanded for final merits analysis of whether petitioner demonstrates sustained acclaim among top of field.

Petitioner seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Service center denied petition; AAO remanded matter to director for full consideration of entire record including claims and evidence submitted with appeal. No analysis of specific criteria provided.

Financial technology company petitions for beneficiary in fintech as extraordinary ability immigrant. Claimed six criteria; director found two met. AAO finds three criteria satisfied: judging, leading role, and scholarly articles via comparable evidence of trade show presentations. Matter remanded for final merits analysis on sustained acclaim.