Published AAO appeal decisions

A digital marketing company sponsors a data scientist for EB-2 with national interest waiver. The AAO found the beneficiary qualified for EB-2 with an advanced degree and the endeavor has substantial merit, but rejected the waiver because the petitioner failed to demonstrate the proposed work has national importance, only that STEM fields are important generally.

A senior SoC researcher sought EB-2 NIW under Dhanasar. The AAO found substantial merit and national importance of his hardware security research but held he failed to show he is well-positioned to advance it, lacking contemporaneous evidence of impact or specific advancement plan.

Radio station and social media entrepreneur sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Petitioner claimed eight criteria; service center found three met but concluded lack of sustained national or international acclaim and top-tier recognition. AAO affirmed dismissal, finding awards lacked significance and overall evidence insufficient for extraordinary ability standard.

A quality control manager with an advanced degree seeks EB-2 national interest waiver. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding the beneficiary's proposed work as a quality control manager lacked sufficient prospective impact to satisfy the national importance prong of Dhanasar, even in a strategically important defense infrastructure sector.

Computer scientist with advanced degree proposed developing computer vision and large language models for drug discovery. AAO found SCOPS failed to adequately analyze whether endeavor has substantial merit and national importance, contained contradictory statements on second prong, and insufficiently analyzed third prong. Decision withdrawn and remanded.

A principal scientist in chemistry claimed five criteria but satisfied only two. The AAO found published material did not meet regulatory requirements and citation metrics alone do not demonstrate contributions of major significance. Appeal dismissed for failing to establish three qualifying criteria.

A machine learning scientist with a U.S. PhD in computational biosciences sought EB-2 NIW classification for developing bioinformatics algorithms and predictive models for disease detection and precision medicine. The AAO affirmed denial, finding the endeavor had substantial merit but lacked national importance and the petitioner was not well positioned to advance it without demonstrating broader impact or employer approval for external research dissemination.

A research and development engineer in textile materials science sought a national interest waiver for work on durable protective textiles. The AAO agreed the endeavor has merit and national importance but dismissed the appeal because education, publications, citations and letters did not show he was well positioned to advance it; the balancing prong was reserved.

An entrepreneur in civil engineering with a Brazilian engineering degree sought EB-2 classification with a national interest waiver for a construction management company focusing on infrastructure modernization and sustainability. The AAO dismissed because the petitioner did not demonstrate that her specific endeavor would have substantial national importance beyond general industry benefits.

A CEO self-petitioned for EB-1A. Met three criteria including awards, articles, and leadership role. AAO dismissed because final merits analysis showed insufficient sustained national or international acclaim for extraordinary ability despite meeting evidentiary threshold.

Accounting and tax consultant sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. She met one of ten criteria in initial review. The AAO dismissed successive motions to reopen and reconsider because they lacked new facts or documentary evidence not already considered, and did not address the underlying merits.

An actor in television and films sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. He claimed five criteria including published material and commercial success. The AAO found only one criterion met and dismissed the appeal, finding insufficient evidence of national or international acclaim at the very top of the field.

An individual seeking extraordinary ability classification had the petition denied, then filed a motion that the service center rejected as untimely. The AAO held the motion was timely under COVID-19 filing flexibilities, since it was filed within 90 days plus mailing time, and remanded for a decision on the motion's merits. The criteria were not analyzed.

A petitioner seeking EB-2 classification with a national interest waiver brought a further motion to reconsider after repeated dismissals. The AAO dismissed it as moot because the petitioner had since received an approved immigrant petition and become a permanent resident, so the Dhanasar prongs were not analyzed.

Event planner sought EB-2 with national interest waiver for a consultancy firm in event planning and training. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding the petitioner failed to establish national importance; the business impact was limited to the company and its clients with no demonstrated industry-wide influence or substantial economic effect.

Music director sought EB-1A extraordinary ability. On motion, claimed awards and judging participation without supporting evidence. AAO dismissed finding Latin Grammy participation certificate did not constitute a prize or award in musical director field and judging claims lacked corroboration.

An entrepreneur in STEM education proposed to establish a coding academy for underrepresented groups. The AAO found the endeavor has substantial merit but lacks national importance as a specific undertaking, and dismissed the appeal without addressing remaining Dhanasar prongs.

Senior manager of data science with Ph.D. in biostatistics sought EB-2 NIW to develop multivariate temporal models using AI for gene regulatory networks and socioeconomic systems. AAO found proposed research has national importance but petitioner's employment role only benefits employer, not the nation; petitioner not well positioned to advance endeavor.

Senior machine learning engineer proposes research on foundational model disentanglement and interpretability. AAO found the endeavor has substantial merit and national importance but rejected the petition because the petitioner failed to demonstrate she is well-positioned to advance it through sufficient record of success or influence in the field.

Senior software engineer with PhD in computer science proposes distributed query optimization research. AAO found the research endeavor meritorious but distinguished between proposed independent research and employer-specific benefits, finding the latter lacks national importance. Petition dismissed because petitioner failed second prong.

An epidemiologist sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding the petitioner met only two of ten criteria and lacked sufficient documentation of sustained national or international acclaim placing him among the very top of his field.

Digital marketing and computer vision entrepreneur self-petitioned for EB-1A extraordinary ability. Claimed five evidentiary criteria but met only one regarding published articles. AAO withdrew SCOPS salary finding and affirmed that petitioner failed three-criterion threshold for immigrant visa eligibility.

Entrepreneur seeks national interest waiver for EB-2 classification but lacks required advanced degree or proven exceptional ability. AAO held she failed to establish advanced degree eligibility and that her proposed endeavor lacks national importance; serves underserved clients but lacks broader field impact, accomplishments, or demonstrated track record.

A senior research scientist with a PhD sought national interest waiver for EB-2 classification in artificial intelligence and privacy technology. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding the proposed research lacked demonstrated national importance under Dhanasar's first prong despite the field's merit and importance.