Published AAO appeal decisions

Clinical trials specialist sought NIW for EB-2 to increase ethnic minority participation in drug development. AAO affirmed denial, finding the proposed seven-person business lacked sufficient national importance in healthcare or economy despite furthering a valid national goal of eliminating health disparities.

A software engineer sought NIW for cloud computing work. AAO agreed that although the field has substantial merit, the petitioner's specific proposed endeavor lacks national importance. Petitioner failed to demonstrate broader implications beyond his company or how his work would impact the industry or region more broadly.

A rock climber sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The petitioner claimed membership, published material, and judging criteria but failed to meet any. The AAO affirmed dismissal, finding she did not establish the three criteria required and did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or a position among the very top.

Physical chemist seeks NIW for research on surface science machines and heterogeneous catalysis for clean energy. Substantial merit established but national importance not demonstrated. Petitioner presented general field importance and air quality statistics but failed to show specific prospective impact of proposed endeavor. Appeal dismissed.

A neuroscience researcher with a Ph.D. in neurobiology and six years of postdoctoral experience sought an EB-2 national interest waiver for research on neuropathic pain. The AAO reversed the service center's denial, finding the proposed endeavor had substantial merit and national importance, the petitioner was well positioned to advance it, and a waiver would benefit the United States.

A modeling student petitioner claimed four EB-1A criteria but failed to provide properly certified translations of foreign language documents supporting awards, membership, and judging claims. The AAO affirmed dismissal because none of the criteria were sufficiently established, falling short of the required three.

Actuarial associate sought EB-2 with national interest waiver to provide AI and machine learning solutions improving pension program solvency for public servants. The AAO dismissed, holding the petitioner failed to demonstrate the proposed endeavor has national importance; letters of support and general field importance do not establish the specific endeavor's broader implications.

Aerospace engineer and robotics researcher sought EB-2 with national interest waiver to research autonomous decision-making algorithms. The AAO found the proposed endeavor had substantial merit and national importance but dismissed the appeal because the petitioner failed to show he was well positioned to advance the research through publications with minimal citations and insufficient evidence of research impact.

A senior lead consultant sought EB-2 exceptional ability classification with a national interest waiver. The AAO dismissed the appeal because the petitioner met only one of the needed three exceptional ability criteria, with salary and recognition evidence insufficient. It therefore did not reach the waiver analysis under the Dhanasar framework.

A business legal consultant self-petitioned for EB-1A extraordinary ability. She claimed eight criteria but the AAO found she did not meet the minimum three evidentiary criteria and lacked sustained national or international acclaim or a place among the small percentage at the top of her field.

Veterinarian entrepreneur seeks EB-2 national interest waiver to establish rural veterinary services firm in New York. Proposed providing affordable livestock veterinary care and food safety services. AAO found endeavor has substantial merit but lacks national importance; projected employment and revenue insufficient to demonstrate impact beyond local clients.

An audio-visual agency filed for a cinematographer and drone cameraman with extraordinary ability. The AAO found he met two criteria (judging and exhibitions) but failed the third-criterion threshold and final merits test for sustained acclaim at field leadership level.

Petitioner is an applied scientist with a master's degree in computer science proposing AI research. The AAO dismissed the appeal because the petitioner failed to establish that his specific proposed endeavor has national importance; generalized claims about AI advancement without detailed prospective work plans are insufficient.

Physicist sought EB-1A classification. Service center found two criteria met but rejected original contributions claim. AAO remanded because service center misapplied national interest waiver analytical framework to extraordinary ability petition and failed to adequately explain why supporting letters and evidence were insufficient for original contributions criterion.

AI manufacturer petitioned for beneficiary's EB-2 national interest waiver. Beneficiary qualified for underlying EB-2 but failed NIW Dhanasar first prong; proposed work lacked demonstrated national importance and broader implications beyond company and clients.

A musician and music educator sought EB-2 immigrant classification with national interest waiver. SCOPS established advanced degree eligibility but denied the waiver. The AAO remanded because SCOPS failed to sufficiently analyze the three Dhanasar prongs and did not put the petitioner on notice of evidentiary deficiencies.

Pharmaceutical research scientist sought EB-1A classification claiming three criteria. AAO dismissed appeal, finding only judging and scholarly articles met but original contributions lacked evidence of major significance and sustained national or international acclaim.

Ethnomusicology researcher meets four initial criteria (publications, judging, scholarly articles, critical role) but AAO held totality of evidence does not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or small-percentage-at-top status: publication record typical for specialized field, media coverage lacks comparative context, and judging not shown to be prestigious.

A cybersecurity expert claimed six EB-1A criteria. SCOPS found two met; AAO confirmed two and identified a third criterion met, satisfying initial evidence requirements. The AAO remanded for final merits analysis of whether the petitioner demonstrates sustained national or international acclaim.

Physician and research fellow in immunology sought EB-1A classification. Met two criteria: published material and judging. Awards not recognized for field excellence; original contributions not demonstrated as major significance. Failed three-criterion threshold. Appeal dismissed.

A cosmetics expert claimed extraordinary ability through seven criteria. The petitioner established judging and scholarly articles but failed awards and published material. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding the record insufficient to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim required for the classification.

Novelist sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. AAO affirmed dismissal because petitioner met only two of ten criteria and failed to satisfy the required minimum of three. Membership criterion failed because published works do not constitute outstanding achievements; contributions criterion failed for lack of demonstrated major significance in field.

Civil engineer with Ph.D. sought NIW for research on structural reliability and truck platooning safety. AAO found endeavor had substantial merit and national importance but dismissed appeal because petitioner failed to show he was well positioned to advance it or that waiving labor certification would benefit the nation.

Petitioner seeks NIW as EB-2 member with advanced degree, proposing to provide real estate consulting services through his company. SCOPS found substantial merit but denied national importance and waiver. AAO upheld dismissal, finding petitioner failed to demonstrate broader field or economic impact rising to national importance level.

Electrical engineer sought NIW for research on power grid efficiency and sustainability. AAO dismissed appeal because proposed endeavor lacks national importance despite alignment with climate goals, and evidence demonstrates past qualifications rather than prospective impact of specific proposed work.