Published AAO appeal decisions

Employer-sponsored Spanish language instructor using art to teach foreign languages sought EB-1A. Met two criteria: judging and critical role. AAO dismissed because record lacked sufficient evidence of sustained national or international acclaim required for extraordinary ability.

A bassoonist claiming EB-1A extraordinary ability satisfied two of ten evidentiary criteria: judging and artistic exhibitions. The AAO dismissed the appeal because the petitioner failed to demonstrate a third required criterion and lacked evidence of sustained national or international acclaim necessary for extraordinary ability classification.

Athletic coach claimed three criteria for extraordinary ability in soccer coaching. Director found one criterion met. Petitioner on appeal reasserted awards and published material criteria. AAO held petitioner failed to establish awards were nationally recognized or that published material about him as coach appeared in major media, lacking required sustained acclaim.

Recording engineer and producer from Brazil claiming seven evidentiary criteria for EB-1A extraordinary ability. AAO found only published material criterion met, not the required three. Record does not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or placement at very top of field despite successful work with well-known artists.

Self-petitioning nail design artist claims extraordinary ability through international awards, published materials, judging participation, scholarly articles, and leadership role. AAO sustained appeal, finding petitioner demonstrated sustained international acclaim and expertise placing her among the small percentage at the very top of her field.

A martial arts professional sought extraordinary ability classification, and the service center denied the petition for failing to meet three evidentiary criteria. During the appeal, the petitioner obtained approval of a separate extraordinary ability petition and asked to move his pending adjustment applications to it. The AAO dismissed the appeal as moot without examining any criteria.

An oceanographer sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. She met two criteria: scholarly articles and judging. The AAO found her original contributions did not show major significance and that she lacked the sustained national or international acclaim and top-tier standing required for EB-1A classification.

A hospitality entrepreneur and bar professional sought extraordinary ability classification, claiming eight criteria. The Director accepted two, judging and leading role. The AAO agreed on those two but found the awards criterion unmet and deemed scholarly articles waived. It concluded that three criteria were not satisfied and that sustained acclaim was not shown.

A karate athlete sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The petitioner claimed awards, published material, and membership criteria. The AAO found the awards were not nationally or internationally recognized for excellence due to competition restrictions, articles lacked proper documentation, and the overall record did not evidence sustained international acclaim or top-tier standing.

Professional baseball player in Dominican Republic claimed four criteria for EB-1A. AAO found awards and high salary met but rejected published material; membership not established. Only two criteria satisfied; three required. No sustained international acclaim shown.

Microbiology researcher met three initial evidentiary criteria: judging, scholarly articles, and original contributions. AAO sustained appeal finding petitioner demonstrated sustained national and international acclaim through high citation rates, publications in distinguished journals, international presentations, and peer review work indicative of top-tier expertise.

Mixed martial arts athlete claimed major international award and four additional criteria. Director found only published material criterion met. Petitioner on appeal reasserted major award and other criteria. AAO held petitioner lacked evidence of major international award recognition and original athletic contributions, failing sustained acclaim standard.

A professor sought EB-1A classification based on extraordinary ability. She claimed three criteria: judging, scholarly articles, and critical role. The AAO found two criteria met but required three, and the record lacked evidence of national or international acclaim required for the classification.

A mixed martial arts athlete sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The petitioner claimed membership and leading role criteria, submitting Ukrainian Ministry letters. The AAO affirmed the denial, finding conclusory assertions without sufficient evidence of expert judgment of outstanding achievements or specific contributions rising to major significance.

Professional Saddlebred horse trainer self-petitioner claimed extraordinary ability through awards, membership, and judging. AAO affirmed denial; petitioner met only judging criterion; awards lack recognized significance and insufficient evidence demonstrates national or international acclaim.

Professional tennis player seeking extraordinary ability classification failed to establish either major award or three alternate criteria. Court found published material about competitive career insufficient since petitioner intended to work as coach, and salary comparison limited to Chinese players unconvincing. Appeal dismissed.

Urologist seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Petitioner claimed awards and published material criteria; Director found only judging and scholarly articles satisfied. AAO reversed on awards and published material, finding insufficient evidence of national recognition. Appeal dismissed because petitioner failed to establish either major award or three regulatory criteria.

Self-petitioner claims extraordinary ability and receipt of Hispanic American World Congress award. AAO affirmed denial, finding the award does not meet the narrow standard for major, internationally recognized awards comparable to Nobel Prize or Academy Award.

Musician-composer claiming extraordinary ability through invention of hybrid bass guitar and music compositions. Claimed four criteria but met only published material. AAO found original contributions lacked evidence of field impact and scholarly articles failed authorship and publication requirements. Appeal dismissed because fewer than three criteria established.

Fashion model with over a decade of experience and O-1 status claimed six regulatory criteria. Director found only judging criterion satisfied. AAO affirmed that petitioner failed to meet three criteria required for extraordinary ability, lacking major awards and failing to demonstrate sufficient impact through publications, original contributions, or critical roles.

A Thai musician and musical instrument maker claimed extraordinary ability. The AAO found one criterion met: artistic display. Five other claimed criteria failed due to insufficient documentation of recognition level and national or international acclaim. The petitioner lacked evidence of sustained recognition in the field.

A soccer coach sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The director found one criterion met (judging); the AAO affirmed only this finding. With one criterion met against the three required and no major award, the petitioner failed to demonstrate the sustained national or international acclaim required.

Product manager with doctorate in robotics and AI sought EB-1A extraordinary ability. AAO found three criteria met (awards, scholarly articles, leading role) but final merits analysis showed achievements insufficient for sustained national/international acclaim at top of field level.

Senior director in business/economics seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability. AAO sustained appeal, finding petitioner met three evidentiary criteria (scholarly articles, leading role, high salary) and demonstrated sustained acclaim at the very top of field through extensive documentation.

Digital media strategy and operations professional claims extraordinary ability. Director found two criteria met; petitioner claimed three additional criteria on appeal. AAO dismissed, finding published material and original contributions not established. Overall, petitioner showed career progression but lacked evidence of sustained acclaim or position among small percentage at field top.