Published AAO appeal decisions

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.

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 neuroscientist claiming extraordinary ability in sciences submitted evidence of original contributions to signal transduction research, scholarly publications, and peer review activities. AAO found three criteria met and sustained overall merits, approving the petition.

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.

Figure skater and coach self-petitioner sought EB-1A as athlete with extraordinary ability. Claimed awards and national team membership criteria. AAO affirmed director's finding that petitioner failed to establish top-level preeminence as either competitor or coach and did not meet three required criteria.

A psychiatrist self-petitioner claimed EB-1A extraordinary ability based on awards, memberships, certifications, and judging experience. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding he did not meet at least three criteria because evidence showed routine occupational duties rather than national or international acclaim at the very top.

A physicist counsel-represented beneficiary claimed EB-1A based on publications, judging, and original contributions. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding only the scholarly articles criterion met and no evidence of sustained national or international acclaim placing him at the very top of his field.

A researcher counsel-represented beneficiary claimed EB-1A based on awards, membership, and publications. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding she failed to demonstrate at least three criteria and lacked sustained national or international acclaim placing her at the very top of her field.

A self-represented individual sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification, and the director found sustained acclaim not shown. On appeal the petitioner offered only a general statement about reputation, with no argument or evidence on the regulatory criteria. The AAO summarily dismissed the appeal for failing to identify any specific error.

A cook petitioned for EB-1A extraordinary ability classification claiming sustained national or international acclaim. The AAO found the petitioner failed to meet at least three regulatory criteria, with no major international award, no qualifying memberships, and no evidence of regular display at exclusive venues. Appeal dismissed.

A self-represented individual sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification, and the director found sustained acclaim not shown. On appeal the petitioner offered only a general statement about reputation and skills, with no argument or evidence on the regulatory criteria. The AAO summarily dismissed the appeal for failing to identify any specific error.

A statistician sought EB-1A classification, claiming prizes, memberships, published material, and citations of scholarly work. The AAO found student-only prizes and fee-based memberships insufficient, and held the citation record did not fit the contributions criterion. Overall, the evidence showed talent but not sustained acclaim at the top, so the appeal was dismissed.

A tennis player turned junior coach sought EB-1A classification in athletics, claiming acclaim earned as a Soviet player and carried into coaching. The AAO held that honors lacked certified translations or recognition, team membership did not suffice, and past acclaim was not sustained through coaching, so the appeal was dismissed.

Athlete seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Director found no sustained national or international acclaim. Appellant failed to submit required detailed brief within six months and provided no specific legal arguments; appeal summarily dismissed under procedural rules.

Tile and stone fabricator-installer seeking EB-1A classification. Self-represented petitioner claimed beneficiary reached level to work unsupervised and offered photographs. AAO found no evidence meeting any of ten regulatory criteria and no documentation of sustained national or international acclaim; petition dismissed.

Alien seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Self-represented petitioner indicated no separate brief or evidence would be submitted on appeal. Appeal summarily dismissed under procedural rules for failure to specifically address denial reasons or provide evidence.

Artist (calligrapher-graphic artist) seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Self-represented petitioner submitted certificates, membership evidence, article, and videotape. AAO found evidence insufficient for any criterion and that petitioner failed to establish sustained national or international acclaim at very top level; petition dismissed.

Hair stylist claiming extraordinary ability based on South American awards and professional positions. AAO held awards insufficient: insufficient documentation and no sustained acclaim for ten years before filing. Position as judge and television work held too long ago. No evidence of sustained national or international acclaim required for EB-1A.

Self-petitioner singer claimed extraordinary ability based on one 1986 award, Academy membership, published material, and original contributions. AAO found the award uncorroborated, career limited to 1986–1988, no sustained acclaim demonstrated, and evidence insufficient to show top-tier achievement.