Published AAO appeal decisions

Theatrical producer seeking EB-1A classification. Met four of ten initial criteria (published material, display, leading role, commercial success) but failed final merits analysis. Director's decision lacked thorough evaluation of all evidence and did not adequately explain why achievements failed to demonstrate small percentage at field top. Remanded for complete final merits analysis.

Construction estimator seeking EB-2 NIW claimed proposed construction firm would address infrastructure and affordable housing. AAO held the specific endeavor lacks national importance because the record does not establish substantial positive economic effects beyond the petitioner's company and clients.

A musician sought EB-2 classification with national interest waiver. The petitioner claimed exceptional ability but failed to meet three of six regulatory criteria. The AAO found membership in Brazilian Musicians Association insufficient and contributions limited to personal performing and one education tool, lacking field-wide impact.

A mechanical engineer seeks EB-2 national interest waiver to work as construction manager in oil and gas sector. The AAO found substantial merit but no national importance, as the work lacks prospective impact beyond the employer and clients to broader industry implications.

Risk management advisor in occupational health and safety sought EB-2 NIW. Service center found advanced degree qualification but denied waiver. AAO affirmed: proposed endeavor of providing consulting services lacked national importance under Dhanasar's first prong because benefits would not extend beyond her employer and clientele to impact the field broadly.

A personal financial advisor sought EB-2 with national interest waiver under Dhanasar framework. The AAO affirmed dismissal because the petitioner failed to establish substantial merit and national importance of the proposed endeavor, offering only generalized assertions about attracting investment and supporting clients without showing broader field or national impact.

Cancer research scientist sought EB-1A classification based on extraordinary ability. Petitioner claimed membership and original contributions criteria in addition to judging and scholarly articles already found met. AAO affirmed membership criterion was not satisfied and original contributions lacked required major significance. Overall, evidence did not demonstrate sustained acclaim or placement at the very top of the field.

Physician-researcher in urologic oncology with advanced degree seeks EB-2 national interest waiver. Claimed three Dhanasar prongs: substantial merit of clinical and research endeavor, personal positioning to advance it, and balance favoring waiver. AAO sustained appeal, finding all three prongs met based on clinical care contributions, research trajectory, and public health significance.

Swimmer self-petitioner sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Met three initial criteria but AAO affirmed dismissal, finding no sustained national or international acclaim; personal best times ranked outside top tier of global swimmers; national records insufficient to demonstrate top-tier recognition.

A business data engineer sought extraordinary ability classification, claiming several evidentiary criteria after the service center found none met. The AAO accepted the judging criterion but found membership and original contributions unmet. It dismissed the appeal because the evidence did not show sustained acclaim or top-of-field standing.

A micropigmentation makeup artist sought extraordinary ability classification in the arts. After an earlier summary dismissal of the appeal, she filed combined motions to reopen and reconsider. The AAO dismissed them because no new fact showed the appeal had identified a specific error, and no misapplied law or policy was shown.

Self-employed photographer sought EB-2 with national interest waiver. AAO found petitioner met only one of six exceptional ability criteria (academic degree), failing to establish three required criteria. Because underlying EB-2 qualification not established, Dhanasar waiver analysis not reached.

Marketing manager sought EB-2 classification with national interest waiver. AAO dismissed appeal because petitioner's inconsistent statements about the proposed endeavor prevented evaluation of its substantial merit or national importance under Dhanasar framework.

Senior project manager in business management claimed extraordinary ability under EB-1A. Petitioner met judging and high salary criteria but failed awards, membership, and original contributions criteria. AAO dismissed appeal because petitioner satisfied only two of the required three alternate criteria and lacked sustained national or international acclaim.

An entrepreneur without demonstrated advanced degree equivalent sought EB-2 classification as general operations manager for soccer club or events business. AAO dismissed appeal, finding petitioner failed to establish EB-2 eligibility and therefore could not qualify for NIW, without reaching Dhanasar prongs.

A soccer camp petitions for O-1A for a beneficiary transitioning from professional soccer player to coach. The AAO remanded because the Director improperly excluded athletic achievements in assessing extraordinary ability and erred in rejecting the gold medal as major award without requesting additional evidence on coaching eligibility.

Sales representative with advanced degree seeks NIW. Petitioner resubmitted RFE response without addressing Director's grounds for denial. Appeal summarily dismissed under procedural rule because petitioner failed to identify specific erroneous conclusions of law or fact.

Software developer sought EB-2 with national interest waiver. Claimed software engineering work for US company had substantial merit and national importance. AAO held proposed endeavor lacked specificity and national importance; no prospective impact beyond employer and clients; first prong of Dhanasar failed.

Human resources specialist sought NIW for EB-2 classification. She claimed her proposed HR consulting work had national importance via business plan and industry reports. AAO held the endeavor lacked national importance because her work would benefit only specific clients and employers, not the HR field or economy broadly.

A self-petitioner researcher in geospatial information management sought an NIW as an advanced degree professional. The AAO affirmed denial, finding she demonstrated substantial merit and was well-positioned but failed to establish the national importance of her proposed research as required by Dhanasar's first prong.

A nurse sought EB-2 classification with national interest waiver. The AAO affirmed that she lacked an advanced degree equivalent and failed to establish five years of progressive post-baccalaureate experience. As she did not qualify for the underlying EB-2 classification, the Dhanasar analysis was not reached.

A pilot sought EB-2 classification with national interest waiver. The AAO found the petitioner failed to meet evidentiary criteria for exceptional ability or advanced degree professional status, lacking sufficient documentation from employers and relevant credentials, and therefore was ineligible for the underlying classification and waiver.

Vocational agricultural teacher sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Initial petition denied for failing to meet three of ten criteria; appeal dismissed. Motion to reopen and reconsider sought reconsideration without identifying legal error and submitted job offer dated after petition filing, which cannot establish eligibility retroactively. Motion dismissed.

An entrepreneur seeking EB-2 classification with national interest waiver claimed to work in oil and gas consulting. The AAO found the petitioner failed the first Dhanasar prong by providing vague, contradictory descriptions of the proposed endeavor without establishing its specific national importance.

A software engineer with ten years of experience sought an EB-2 national interest waiver for work in cloud security and big data analytics. The AAO affirmed denial, finding his proposed endeavor lacked national importance because he provided no specific evidence of prospective impact extending beyond his own company or immediate clients to the broader industry or economy.