Published AAO appeal decisions

A fashion model from Australia sought EB-1A classification claiming ten evidentiary criteria. The AAO affirmed the service center's finding that she satisfied only one criterion (display at exhibitions). The record lacked evidence of nationally recognized awards, qualifying association membership, or the sustained national/international acclaim required for extraordinary ability status.

Self-petitioner, business supply chain software specialist, sought EB-1A extraordinary ability. Met only one of three required criteria (published material). AAO rejected membership in professional associations and leading role claims due to insufficient evidence and timing issues. Appeal dismissed.

Electrical engineer self-petitioner claimed three criteria for extraordinary ability. AAO agreed with service center that petitioner met none of the claimed criteria: awards, judging, or original contributions. Appeal dismissed for failure to meet three-criterion threshold and lack of sustained acclaim.

Comics creator and illustrator self-petitioning for EB-1A extraordinary ability claimed three criteria. AAO found one criterion met: a nationally recognized Venezuelan award for excellence in plastic arts. Published material and leading critical role claims were rejected. Appeal dismissed because only two of ten required criteria established.

A partner in a capital management firm sought extraordinary ability classification, and the service center denied the petition. The AAO dismissed the appeal as moot because the denial had been reopened and no new decision existed to contest. No criteria were analyzed.

A pastor sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification through Christian missions work. Although the director found four criteria met, the AAO reversed three findings on review and affirmed only published material. With only one criterion met, the petitioner failed to meet the three-criterion threshold and lacked sustained national or international acclaim.

Entrepreneur with twenty years accounting and finance experience in pharmaceutical industry seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability in business. AAO held only two of ten criteria met; three-criterion threshold not satisfied; no major award or exceptional recognition; appeal dismissed.

Fashion designer sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Petitioner claimed four criteria beyond the one (exhibitions) the director conceded. AAO found petitioner met only one criterion, falling short of three required, and held overall record does not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or placement among top of field.

Sambo and judo champion sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. AAO affirmed dismissal because petitioner failed to present either a major international award or three qualifying criteria; record did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim requisite for the classification.

An assistant professor of computer science sought EB-1A classification. The AAO found he met only the scholarly articles criterion, not the required three criteria, and lacked sustained national or international acclaim demonstrating extraordinary ability at the top of his field, dismissing the appeal.

An employer sponsored a radiation oncology physician for EB-1A extraordinary ability. The beneficiary met judging and scholarly articles criteria but failed membership and published material criteria. Original contributions not shown to have major significance. Extraordinary ability sustained acclaim was not established. Appeal dismissed.

Mechanical engineering technical specialist sought EB-1A extraordinary ability. Initial petition denied; appeal summarily dismissed for insufficient argumentation. Petitioner filed six subsequent motions to reopen and reconsider, all dismissed. AAO found no new facts or proper cause warranting reopening.

A tax consultant with a law degree sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. She claimed six criteria but met none. The AAO found her honors and publications did not meet regulatory standards and her achievements, while notable in academia, lacked the sustained national or international acclaim required for extraordinary ability.

A musician who plays a folk stringed instrument sought extraordinary ability classification, claiming six criteria. The Director found four met. The AAO withdrew two of those findings, leaving only two criteria satisfied, short of the required three, and dismissed the appeal.

An embroiderer seeks EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The petitioner claimed eight of ten regulatory criteria. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding the petitioner satisfied fewer than three criteria and lacked sustained national or international acclaim required for extraordinary ability.

Jewelry maker claims extraordinary ability in arts. Director found two criteria met; petitioner claimed four additional on appeal. AAO dismissed, rejecting membership, published material, original contributions, and scholarly articles. Record does not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or position among top field practitioners.

Oil and gas construction specialist with master's degree sought EB-1A classification. Petitioner claimed five criteria; service center found two met (judging, scholarly articles). AAO affirmed two criteria met but found petitioner did not demonstrate extraordinary ability—lacking the sustained national or international acclaim required for the very top tier of the field.

A film and media editor sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Though he met only one criterion (exhibitions), the AAO rejected awards and leading role findings due to insufficient documentation. He failed to meet the three-criterion threshold and lacked evidence of sustained national or international acclaim.

Senior life science product consultant claimed extraordinary ability through six criteria. Director found two met. AAO found three criteria satisfied and withdrew denial, requiring final merits review to assess sustained national or international acclaim at the very top of the field.

A research scientist filed an extraordinary ability petition that the service center denied for failing to meet three of ten criteria. On appeal, the AAO did not review the merits because the petitioner had since become a permanent resident, making the matter moot, and dismissed the appeal.

Soccer coach sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. AAO held although petitioner met three initial evidentiary criteria, evidence demonstrated only past national acclaim in Trinidad and Tobago with no recent materials, failing to show sustained national or international acclaim required for extraordinary ability classification.

Aerospace technology specialist in air transportation modeling claiming extraordinary ability. Met scholarly articles and judging criteria but failed membership, original contributions, and leading role criteria. Only two of ten criteria established despite claiming four additional. Appeal dismissed for insufficient evidence of top-tier recognition.

Public relations director sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. She claimed six criteria including awards, membership, and original contributions. AAO held she failed to meet at least three criteria: awards were organizational not individual, and membership evidence lacked required bylaws documentation.

Researcher in life sciences with doctoral degree from Chile sought EB-1A extraordinary ability. AAO found three criteria met: scholarly articles, original contributions, and judging. Final merits determination confirmed sustained national acclaim and revolutionary research impact on medical practice, warranting extraordinary ability classification.

A neurobiology researcher sought extraordinary ability classification after the service center found the initial evidentiary criteria unmet. The researcher filed two appeals of that denial. The AAO sustained the other appeal, so this duplicate appeal was dismissed as moot, and the petition will be approved through the sustained appeal.