Published AAO appeal decisions

Metallurgical engineer with advanced degree sought NIW for continued manufacturing work. Under Dhanasar, petitioner established EB-2 eligibility but failed to demonstrate national importance; proposed work affected only employer and customers, not broader industry or field. Appeal dismissed.

Spanish language teacher and specialist sought EB-1A extraordinary ability in education. Petitioner claimed six criteria but provided insufficient documentation for each. Director found only two criteria met; petitioner failed to meet the required three. AAO affirmed dismissal, finding no extraordinary ability demonstrated.

Operetta performer sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification in arts. Petitioner met three initial evidentiary criteria (judging, exhibitions, published material) but failed final merits determination. AAO found petitioner talented but not demonstrating sustained acclaim or top-tier status required for extraordinary ability.

BIM specialist in sustainable architecture design sought EB-2 national interest waiver. Petitioner qualified for advanced-degree classification but failed to respond to RFE requesting evidence under three-part Dhanasar framework. Appeal dismissed as abandoned and on merits for insufficient national importance.

A dance studio sought O-2 classification for an individual accompanying a competitive ballroom dancer whose concurrent O-1 petition was filed. The AAO dismissed the appeal because the O-1 petition had been denied and its appeal dismissed, leaving no O-1 individual to support, so the O-2 petition could not be approved.

Mathematics professor claimed extraordinary ability in education and sought EB-1A classification. Petitioner met one of ten required criteria (scholarly articles) but did not satisfy awards, original contributions, critical role, or salary requirements. AAO dismissed appeal for failure to meet minimum three-criterion threshold.

An attorney, mediator, journalist and author claimed extraordinary ability. The AAO found the petitioner satisfied only two of ten required criteria: judging and scholarly articles. Because three criteria are required, the appeal was dismissed without a final merits determination.

An advertising creative director and agency president claimed extraordinary ability in business. The AAO found the petitioner satisfied five evidentiary criteria: awards, published material, judging, high salary, and leading role. The final merits analysis showed sustained national acclaim through extensive awards, media coverage, and judging at prestigious competitions, warranting classification.

A director sought extraordinary ability classification in art. The service center denied the petition. On appeal the petitioner stated a brief would follow but filed nothing and identified no erroneous conclusion. The appeal was summarily dismissed for that failure, so no criteria were analyzed.

Research and development engineer sought EB-2 national interest waiver. Petitioner established advanced degree and was well positioned to advance proposed engineering and software work. However, failed to demonstrate prospective impact beyond company clients sufficient for national importance. Appeal dismissed.

A thoroughbred horse breeder sought EB-1A classification in business. The petitioner demonstrated three criteria: published material on major media, judging of horse breeding suitability, and original contributions through breeding champion horses and introducing new bloodlines. The aggregate record established sustained national and international acclaim as someone at the very top of the field. Appeal sustained.

A thoroughbred training and racing proprietor filed a petition for an internationally recognized athlete under the P-1A classification. The director denied it. The AAO summarily dismissed the appeal because the petitioner never identified a specific erroneous conclusion of law or fact and submitted no promised brief or evidence.

A representational painter conducting collaborative shows sought EB-1A classification in the arts. The petitioner met only two of three required criteria: published material and exhibitions. Original contributions claim failed because sales and local gallery success do not demonstrate impact on the field as a whole. Petitioner also failed to show intent to continue work in visual arts. Appeal dismissed.

Film director and screenwriter appealed EB-1A denial. Met only one of ten criteria (judging). AAO reversed director's favorable finding on awards and rejected claims of published material, original contributions, and high salary due to insufficient documentation and specificity.

A youth soccer academy petitions for O-1A classification for an experienced soccer coach. The academy claimed five criteria but satisfied none. The AAO upheld dismissal because the beneficiary failed to meet the threshold of at least three criteria through proper initial evidence.

Plastic surgeon appealed EB-2 national interest waiver denial under Dhanasar framework. Met first prong (substantial merit and national importance of proposed research). Failed second prong: insufficient evidence he was well-positioned to advance endeavor; lacks documentation of impact or reputation in field.

An Indian classical dancer sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. AAO held petitioner met only one of ten required criteria (exhibitions) and failed to establish three-criterion threshold, finding no one-time major award or aggregate evidence of extraordinary ability and sustained national or international acclaim.

A supply chain analyst with advanced degrees sought EB-2 national interest waiver for statistical analysis and traffic route optimization work. AAO held the proposed endeavor lacked sufficient national importance as impact was limited to the petitioner's company, not the field broadly, failing the first Dhanasar prong.

Chinese classical dancer claimed extraordinary ability through awards, published material, original contributions, and artistic display. AAO found she met only one criterion (artistic display); awards not nationally or internationally recognized, articles in low-circulation publications not major media, and contributions lacked supporting documentation, falling short of three-criterion requirement.

A pop singer sought extraordinary ability classification, claiming a major award and eight regulatory criteria. The appeals office found no qualifying one-time achievement and fewer than three criteria satisfied, citing missing evidence of recognition, membership requirements, media details and sales receipts. The appeal was dismissed, with the aggregate record also falling short.

Show horse stable petitioned for trainer classified as extraordinary ability in athletics. Petitioner claimed extraordinary ability and submitted comparable evidence under regulatory alternative. AAO dismissed appeal, finding petitioner failed to meet three regulatory criteria and comparable evidence was insufficient.

A social protection specialist sought NIW for EB-2 classification based on international development work in Egypt and Yemen. Petitioner claimed substantial merit and national importance of social protection initiatives, positioning to advance them, and that waiver benefits the US. AAO sustained appeal, finding all three Dhanasar prongs satisfied.

A medical director and spinal surgeon sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Petitioner claimed membership, original contributions, and high salary criteria in addition to judging and scholarly articles. AAO dismissed, finding membership and judging not met and that aggregate record does not demonstrate extraordinary ability.

A chemical engineer sought NIW for EB-2 classification based on chemistry and water treatment research. Petitioner did not respond to AAO RFE requesting evidence of proposed endeavor and Dhanasar framework satisfaction. AAO dismissed appeal as abandoned and found petitioner failed to meet all three Dhanasar prongs.