Published AAO appeal decisions

A medical scientist seeks NIW for research on diseases and therapeutic development. First Dhanasar prong met: research has substantial merit and national importance. Second prong failed: no evidence of financial support, entity interest, or positioning to advance the proposed endeavor in the United States.

Advanced cardiac imaging fellow sought NIW as EB-2 member of professions with advanced degree. Director found her qualified as advanced degree holder but denied NIW. AAO remanded, finding Director failed to properly analyze the three-prong Dhanasar framework, particularly the prospective impact of proposed research and her positioning to advance it.

A violinist who performed with ensembles and orchestras sought extraordinary ability classification. The Director accepted only the display criterion, and the petitioner claimed additional criteria on appeal. The AAO dismissed the appeal because awards and published material were not established, leaving fewer than three criteria and no showing of sustained acclaim.

A chemical engineer with advanced degree sought national interest waiver for EB-2 classification. The AAO found the proposed research had substantial merit and national importance but concluded the petitioner was not well positioned to advance it, dismissing the appeal.

University employer sponsored campus biological safety officer for EB-1A extraordinary ability. Beneficiary met three of ten evidentiary criteria: judging, scholarly articles, and critical role. Final merits analysis found record insufficient to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or small-percentage status at top of biological safety field.

A social work coordinator sought a national interest waiver for an EB-2 position. The AAO found the petitioner qualified for advanced degree classification but failed the first Dhanasar prong: the proposed endeavor lacked national importance, had only state-level scope, and showed no potential for national economic effects or process improvements.

A reconstructive surgeon sought NIW under EB-2 for proposed clinical and surgical practice. AAO dismissed the appeal, finding the proposed endeavor has substantial merit but lacks national importance because petitioner failed to demonstrate broader field impact or significant economic benefits beyond individual geographic areas.

Art museum petitioned for associate curator beneficiary for O-1A extraordinary ability. AAO dismissed appeal, finding no significant national or international award and failure to meet three of six alternate criteria; comparable evidence argument rejected.

A MEMS researcher sought NIW for advanced research in MEMS device design and fabrication. The AAO found his proposed work met the first Dhanasar prong but lacked sufficient evidence under the second prong that he is well positioned to advance the research independently.

Materials chemistry researcher pursuing Ph.D. seeking EB-2 with national interest waiver. Met first Dhanasar prong: proposed research in smart polymers has broader field implications. Failed second prong: insufficient evidence of being well positioned to advance the research despite publications, citations, and support letters. Appeal dismissed.

A lawyer sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The petitioner claimed five criteria and the director found one met. The AAO agreed only one criterion was satisfied and found insufficient sustained national or international acclaim at the top of the field, dismissing the appeal based on uncorroborated assertions and limited objective documentation.

A business executive in the energy industry sought extraordinary ability classification, claiming to rank among top corporate executives worldwide. The Director found only the leading or critical role criterion met. The AAO dismissed the appeal because membership and published material were not established and the record lacked sustained acclaim at the top of the field.

A violinist's approved extraordinary ability petition was revoked by the Director, who found the criteria unmet and false information provided. After a notice of intent to dismiss, she withdrew the appeal. The AAO granted the withdrawal and entered a separate finding of willful material misrepresentation based on altered CD artwork and inconsistent employment claims.

An artist claimed extraordinary ability and satisfaction of six criteria beyond two established by the service center. AAO found petitioner met only judging and exhibitions criteria, failing to establish three required criteria. Record did not demonstrate sustained acclaim or top-tier status.

A photographer displayed work in China and Europe. He claimed multiple evidentiary criteria and met four. The AAO dismissed his appeal because evidence did not demonstrate sustained international acclaim or standing among the very top photographers in the field, despite some exhibition recognition.

Analytical chemist holding advanced degree sought national interest waiver for chemical sensor research. AAO dismissed, finding petitioner relied on past research but did not establish sufficient prospective impact or national importance for revised proposed endeavors involving new research directions.

A musician and composer claimed extraordinary ability through seven criteria. The AAO found only two criteria met: judging and exhibitions. The decision concluded the petitioner failed to establish three required criteria and therefore did not reach final merits analysis, dismissing the appeal.

A dancer and choreographer sought extraordinary ability classification. After the denial, an appeal dismissal and several earlier dismissed motions, she filed a fourth combined motion to reopen and reconsider. The AAO dismissed both, finding no incorrect application of law or policy and no new facts or evidence.

Clinical research coordinator sought national interest waiver for EB-2. AAO dismissed because petitioner provided inconsistent descriptions of her proposed endeavor between initial and amended filings, preventing determination of whether the endeavor had substantial merit and national importance.

A financial manager with an advanced degree sought a national interest waiver of the job offer requirement, proposing to advise businesses on investment strategies and train staff. The AAO held the endeavor lacked demonstrated national importance, since the industry's importance is not the test and economic impact went unsupported. Remaining prongs were not reached.

A civil engineer claimed extraordinary ability for EB-1A based on eight regulatory criteria. The AAO found he satisfied only two criteria (judging and scholarly articles), below the three required, and failed the final merits test for sustained acclaim at the top of the field.

Development director self-petitioned for EB-1A visa. Applicant met three evidentiary criteria but appeal dismissed on final merits. Motions to reopen and reconsider dismissed because petitioner submitted no new facts or evidence and failed to show AAO misapplied law or policy.

A computer hardware and software engineer employed by a development company met three initial evidentiary criteria but failed the final merits determination. The AAO found that while scholarly articles showed field notice and letters demonstrated regard among colleagues, this did not establish sustained national or international acclaim or top percentage status required for extraordinary ability classification.