Published AAO appeal decisions

Entrepreneur sought EB-2 exceptional ability with NIW. AAO dismissed appeal finding petitioner met only two of required three criteria: academic record and membership. Petitioner failed to demonstrate license criterion applied and recognition for achievements; Dhanasar analysis not reached.

Airport operations specialist sought EB-2 NIW classification. Service center found him ineligible for advanced degree category due to less than three years post-degree work experience. AAO upheld denial and held petitioner failed to meet exceptional ability criteria and Dhanasar's first prong, lacking sufficient evidence of expertise, employment history, and national importance of proposed endeavor.

Marketing manager seeking EB-2 NIW for business focused on navigating Brazilian regulatory and financial matters claimed national importance through industry expertise and job creation. AAO held specific endeavor lacks national importance because applicant provided no documentation of prospective impact on field, business plan projections insufficient to demonstrate national economic significance.

A business administrator seeking EB-2 with NIW claimed national importance based on past professional achievements and a self-developed "Triad of Value" method. The AAO found the petitioner misunderstood Dhanasar: the first prong focuses on the proposed endeavor's prospective impact, not the petitioner's execution or prior success.

An agricultural sales representative seeking EB-2 national interest waiver for sales employment. AAO affirmed that proposed activities lack national importance despite projected job creation and increased agricultural product exports, because record failed to establish national significance or industry advancement.

Ph.D. student researching alternative energy storage technologies seeking EB-2 with NIW. AAO held all three Dhanasar prongs satisfied: endeavor has substantial merit and national importance; petitioner well positioned through education and prior work; U.S. benefits from waiver. Appeal sustained.

A cancer researcher seeking EB-2 with NIW to continue research in cancer immunotherapy. AAO sustained the appeal, finding the petitioner met all three Dhanasar prongs: the research has substantial merit and national importance; the petitioner is well positioned to advance it; and waiving labor certification benefits the United States given the work's potential to reduce cancer morbidity and mortality.

Sewing professional claimed exceptional ability under six EB-2 criteria. AAO dismissed the appeal, finding she met only one criterion reliably. Because underlying EB-2 classification was not established, the national interest waiver claim was not addressed.

Security consultant and former Brazilian military police officer sought EB-2 exceptional ability classification with NIW. AAO found he failed to meet three evidentiary criteria: lacked proper professional license, salary not indicative of exceptional ability, and membership organization unsubstantiated. Dhanasar analysis not reached.

A Ph.D. biochemist sought EB-2 national interest waiver to conduct aptamer research for drug detection and treatment. The AAO sustained the appeal, finding all three Dhanasar prongs met: the endeavor had substantial merit and national importance, the petitioner was well-positioned to advance it, and waiving labor certification would benefit the United States.

Business analyst with advanced degree sought national interest waiver for EB-2 to start financial consulting startup. AAO found proposed endeavor lacks national importance due to inconsistent business descriptions, unresolved evidentiary gaps, and lack of industry documentation. Appeal dismissed.

A pilot sought EB-2 exceptional ability classification with national interest waiver. The AAO affirmed the Director's finding that he did not meet three of six regulatory criteria for exceptional ability, failing to establish EB-2 eligibility. Dhanasar framework analysis was not required; appeal dismissed.

Hotel and tourism industry manager sought EB-2 with national interest waiver. AAO affirmed denial, finding petitioner failed to establish EB-2 eligibility as advanced degree professional or individual of exceptional ability. NIW analysis not reached due to lack of underlying qualification.

An entrepreneur planning a trucking business sought EB-2 exceptional ability classification with a national interest waiver. The AAO agreed he met fewer than three initial criteria, due to insufficient evidence of experience, licensure, salary and membership. The waiver itself was not decided, so this is not a Dhanasar decision.

A commercial aircraft pilot sought EB-2 exceptional ability classification with a national interest waiver. Although he met three evidentiary criteria by plain language, the final merits determination found he lacked expertise significantly above ordinary in his field. The AAO affirmed dismissal without reaching the waiver framework.

A civil engineer sought EB-2 advanced degree classification with NIW. The AAO accepted advanced degree eligibility but dismissed the petition because the petitioner failed to consistently articulate a single, well-defined proposed endeavor, preventing meaningful analysis of its merit, national importance, or positioning.

Physical therapist seeking EB-2 NIW to practice physical therapy, focusing on low-income families with disabilities. AAO held DOL Schedule A designation of occupation does not establish national importance; localized benefits to specific individuals do not rise to required national importance level under Dhanasar.

A showjumping horse groom claims EB-1A extraordinary ability. The AAO affirmed dismissal, finding the petitioner failed to meet three of ten criteria and lacks sustained national or international acclaim required for this highly restrictive classification intended for those already at the top of their field.

A quantum optics researcher with PhD in physics seeks NIW for advanced STEM research. AAO sustained approval because the research has substantial merit and national importance per federal science policy, the petitioner is well positioned by education and track record, and the national interest in quantum research outweighs labor market protection.

A general operations manager in transportation and logistics seeks NIW for EB-2 exceptional ability. He claimed all six evidentiary criteria but the AAO found he failed to meet the minimum three criteria requirement, lacking eligibility for the underlying EB-2 classification and thus ineligible for NIW consideration.

A costume designer for athletes and performers seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. AAO dismissed the appeal, finding the petitioner met only one of ten evidentiary criteria (exhibitions) and failed to demonstrate the three-criteria threshold or sustained national or international acclaim required for extraordinary ability.

A logistics analyst sought EB-2 exceptional ability classification and national interest waiver to establish a logistics company. The AAO found he met three evidentiary criteria but lacked the degree of expertise significantly above ordinary in business. The appeal was dismissed without reaching waiver analysis.

Physical therapist seeking EB-2 with NIW to operate business providing therapy services. Claimed national importance based on profession shortage. AAO affirmed denial: shortage of practitioners does not establish national importance of specific endeavor; individual clinical practice lacks broader implications required by Dhanasar framework.

Cellist seeking EB-2 NIW based on claimed prestigious status and intent to establish a quartet. Petitioner relied on prior awards, degrees, and membership to show exceptional ability. AAO affirmed dismissal, finding petitioner did not establish that endeavor has national importance; recognition was largely confined to Florida, not international.

Business administration specialist sought NIW under EB-2 for produce import and distribution endeavor. Petitioner claimed industry knowledge and hiring would demonstrate national importance. AAO held the specific endeavor lacks national importance; industry importance alone insufficient; projected economic benefits do not reach substantial national or regional economic effects required by Dhanasar.