Published AAO appeal decisions

Statistician sought EB-1A classification based on dissertation prize, professional memberships, and citation record. AAO dismissed, finding academic awards limited to student competition, memberships non-exclusive, citations alone insufficient for three criteria, and overall evidence failing to demonstrate sustained national acclaim.

Business intelligence systems analyst and developer sought extraordinary ability classification. Petitioner claimed judging, original contributions, and leading role. AAO found judging limited to employment duties, recommendation letters insufficient to show major field significance beyond acquaintances, and no documentary evidence of organizational role or reputation.

Acrobatic performer claimed EB-1A extraordinary ability. Beneficiary met two of ten criteria including original contributions to knockabout style. AAO found evidence of talent and influence but insufficient to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim at very top of acrobatic field. Appeal dismissed.

Self-petitioner sought EB-1A classification based on youth awards and association membership. AAO dismissed appeal, finding awards limited to local recognition, membership criteria unmet, and no published material in major media. Overall evidence insufficient to show sustained acclaim.

Market research analyst claimed EB-1A extraordinary ability in sciences or business. Petitioner submitted awards, memberships, and evaluation responsibilities but met no criteria. AAO found successful professional in Romania and valued employee in California but insufficient evidence of sustained national or international acclaim. Appeal dismissed.

Senior software engineer in computer vision sought EB-1A extraordinary ability. Petition initially approved but revoked. AAO affirmed revocation finding petitioner met no criteria. Evidence showed talent but insufficient to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim at very top of field. Appeal dismissed.

A gymnastics coach claiming extraordinary ability based on alleged Olympic participation and coaching accomplishments. The AAO found no corroboration of Olympic participation, insufficient recognition of awards, inadequate published material documentation, and letters of support insufficient to demonstrate sustained national acclaim at the top of the field.

Musician and musical director filed EB-1A petition claiming extraordinary ability. Petitioner met only two of ten required criteria. AAO found regional success and upward career trajectory but insufficient evidence of sustained national or international acclaim at very top of field. Appeal dismissed.

A pharmacokinetics reviewer at the FDA seeking extraordinary ability classification based on awards, membership, published material, peer review, and leadership roles. The AAO found only published work met criteria; other evidence was insufficient to establish sustained national acclaim warranting extraordinary ability classification.

A self-represented individual, whose occupation is not stated in the decision, sought extraordinary ability classification. The director found sustained acclaim not established. The appeal contained only a request for reconsideration and no argument or evidence on the regulatory criteria, so the AAO summarily dismissed it without analyzing any criterion.

A self-represented petitioner seeking extraordinary ability classification with insufficient documentation. The AAO found awards lacked recognition evidence, membership did not meet criteria, published material was inadequately documented, judging duties were not established as professional-level, and no evidence showed intent to continue work in the United States.

A Chinese acrobat claimed extraordinary ability in athletics and the arts. She submitted awards and association membership as evidence. The AAO found her awards lacked national recognition, her association membership required only experience not outstanding achievement, and no published materials existed. She failed to meet the three-criterion threshold and did not demonstrate sustained acclaim at the top.

Martial artist and instructor claiming extraordinary ability based on wushu competition awards, committee membership, and media articles. AAO found championship awards insufficient significance, membership criteria unsatisfied without official bylaws, articles not published in major media, and statement of intent to open training center lacked financing details. Appeal dismissed.

A self-represented petitioner sought extraordinary ability classification but submitted an appellate submission without arguments, evidence, or brief addressing regulatory criteria. The AAO summarily dismissed the appeal for failure to identify erroneous conclusions of law or statement of fact.

A self-represented petitioner appealed an extraordinary ability denial but submitted no arguments, evidence, or brief addressing the regulatory criteria at 8 C.F.R. 204.5(h)(3). The AAO summarily dismissed the appeal for failure to identify erroneous conclusions or provide additional evidence.

A registered somatic movement therapist claimed extraordinary ability in sciences. She submitted a dance scholarship, association certifications, and peer-review activities as evidence. The AAO found the scholarship insufficient, certifications did not prove outstanding achievement, no published materials existed, and teaching did not constitute judging. She failed to meet the three-criterion threshold.

Self-petitioner, a vegetable carver, sought EB-1A classification claiming awards, membership, and exhibitions. The AAO found petitioner met none of these criteria and did not achieve the sustained national or international acclaim necessary for extraordinary ability.

Research scientist with NSF funding and academic appointment claiming extraordinary ability. Submitted expert witness letters and job offers alongside article publications. AAO rejected awards, judging, and contribution claims; found publication expected at postdoctoral level insufficient; ruled research assistant role not leading or critical despite employer reputation. Appeal dismissed.

Biomedical researcher seeking EB-1A classification met two criteria: original contributions and scholarly articles, evidenced by National Academy of Science endorsements and citations. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding only two of three required criteria met and that evidence did not establish sustained national or international acclaim at the very top.

Pharmacokinetics reviewer at FDA sought EB-1A classification. The AAO found petitioner met only the scholarly articles criterion and failed to meet three required criteria. Evidence did not establish sustained national or international acclaim at the very top of the scientific field.

A self-represented petitioner sought extraordinary ability classification after the director found no sustained national or international acclaim. On appeal the petitioner asserted general recognition in the field and asked for reconsideration, with no argument or evidence. The AAO summarily dismissed the appeal for not specifying any erroneous conclusion.

Visual artist claiming extraordinary ability based on local exhibitions, newspaper articles, and association participation. AAO found participation certificate not a top honor, membership criteria unsatisfied, published material limited to regional Spanish-language press without sustained coverage, and exhibitions insufficient for national reputation. Appeal dismissed.

A recreational and movement therapist self-petitioned for EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Petitioner claimed awards, membership, published material, and judging criteria. AAO upheld director's denial, finding insufficient evidence of sustained national or international acclaim or status within the small percentage at the very top of the field.

A self-represented petitioner sought extraordinary ability classification after the director found no sustained national or international acclaim. On appeal the petitioner offered only a general statement about reputation and a request for reconsideration, with no argument or evidence. The AAO summarily dismissed the appeal for failing to identify any specific error.

A petitioner of unstated occupation, represented by counsel, sought extraordinary ability classification, and the director found sustained acclaim not established. Counsel asserted misapplied standards but never filed the promised brief or evidence, even after an AAO inquiry. The AAO summarily dismissed the appeal for failing to identify any specific error.