Published AAO appeal decisions

A chemist working for a pharmaceutical company claimed four criteria for extraordinary ability. The AAO affirmed the director's finding on judging and scholarly articles but rejected original contributions, finding employer statements about trade secrets and potential drug discoveries lacked evidence of major field impact.

Molecular biochemist and postdoctoral researcher sought extraordinary ability classification. Met two criteria (judging, scholarly articles). Original contributions criterion rejected because supporting letters lacked specificity on field impact and citation metrics alone insufficient. Appeal dismissed for failure to meet three-criterion threshold.

A neuroscientist appealed denial of EB-1A petition. The AAO found three criteria met: published materials, scholarly articles, and leading critical roles. However, the final merits determination failed; peer review participation and publication venues alone did not establish the sustained national or international acclaim and top-tier status required for extraordinary ability.

Retail business consultant sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Director dismissed motion improperly. AAO held Director failed to analyze new evidence of original contributions and did not conduct required two-part review, remanding for reconsideration with full analysis of claimed criteria and final merits determination.

Landscape architect and associate professor claimed extraordinary ability under EB-1A. Met three initial criteria: judging, scholarly articles, and exhibitions. AAO found the three-criterion threshold satisfied but dismissed on final merits, concluding the petitioner failed to demonstrate sustained international acclaim or placement among the top percentage in the field.

Entrepreneur and founder of luxury automobile club in China claiming extraordinary ability in business. Claimed three criteria on appeal: judging, original contributions, and others already met. AAO dismissed, finding only two criteria met, below the three required, and no sustained international acclaim or top percentile achievement.

Executive accountant and founder claimed extraordinary ability through judging, publications, and critical role. AAO agreed three criteria met, triggering final merits analysis. However, found sporadic publication record and limited auditing history insufficient to demonstrate sustained acclaim and top tier standing in accounting field.

Film and television director seeks EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Claimed five criteria including awards, published material, original contributions, critical role, and artistic display. AAO rejected awards and published material as lacking substantiation. Critical role claim failed for insufficient evidence of organizational distinction. Appeal dismissed for failure to meet three required initial criteria.

A writer and consultant in occupational safety and mediation claimed seven criteria for extraordinary ability, later adding two more. The AAO found only judging criterion met and concluded insufficient evidence of the required acclaim for sustained national or international recognition in the field.

A quantitative analyst and vice president at a financial firm sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding the petitioner met only leading role and high salary criteria, but failed on scholarly articles lacking major publication venues and original contributions lacking field-wide impact.

A venture capital firm managing partner claimed five EB-1A criteria. The AAO affirmed the director's finding that the petitioner met none of them, finding articles not in major media, contributions not of major significance, and scholarship not established. The decision declined final merits review.

A Contemporary Christian music composer and director sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The AAO found he met only one criterion: judging. Awards lacked recognition, original contributions showed no broad field impact. Appeal dismissed for failure to meet three-criterion requirement.

A chemistry, manufacturing, and controls regulatory affairs researcher met three evidentiary criteria (published material, judging, scholarly articles). However, on final merits the AAO found insufficient evidence of sustained national acclaim or that she ranked among the very top of her field. Limited press coverage and peer review activities did not demonstrate differentiation from peers. Appeal dismissed.

Software development executive in financial technology claimed extraordinary ability via membership, original contributions, critical role, and salary. AAO found only critical role criterion met, disagreed with director on salary, rejected membership and contributions as insufficient. Dismissed for failing three-criterion threshold.

An embedded software engineer in industrial automation sought EB-1A extraordinary ability. The AAO found two criteria met: judging and scholarly articles. Claims of critical role and high salary were rejected as lacking evidence that contributions were significant to employer overall or that compensation exceeded comparable positions, leaving the petitioner one criterion short.

An international tax attorney specializing claimed six criteria but met none. The AAO found his bar association membership, published work, judging, original contributions, scholarly articles, and leading role all unmet. Lacking three criteria and evidence of sustained international acclaim, the petition was dismissed.

A 3D artist and animator in the Philippines sought extraordinary ability classification. He claimed all ten criteria but met only two (judging and high salary). The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding insufficient evidence of the sustained national or international acclaim and career of acclaimed work required for extraordinary ability.

Author and screenwriter seeking EB-1A classification. Claimed awards, published materials in major media, and judging criteria. AAO found 2016 award not nationally recognized, publications lacked major media status, and judging participation insufficiently documented. Appeal dismissed.

Textile embroidery artist sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Director found one criterion met; petitioner claimed six additional criteria on appeal. AAO found petitioner met only one criterion and lacked sustained national or international acclaim. Appeal dismissed.

Vice president of talent acquisition sought EB-1A. Petitioner met two criteria (leading role, high salary) but AAO found insufficient for third required criterion. Award and membership claims rejected: inaugural conference award lacked established reputation, professional certification not equivalent to association membership. Appeal dismissed.

Acrobatic performer and gymnastics coach, formerly with O-1 status, sought EB-1A extraordinary ability. Petitioner met awards and membership criteria but failed published materials. With only two criteria met and no major award, AAO dismissed, finding no evidence of sustained national or international acclaim.

A violinist claimed extraordinary ability under seven criteria including awards, membership, published material, judging, and leading critical role. Only judging and leading critical role criteria were established. Awards, membership, and published material claims were rejected. Acclaim by association with prestigious institutions insufficient. Appeal dismissed.

Greco-Roman wrestler and coach sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. AAO dismissed appeal because petitioner failed to satisfy any of four claimed criteria (awards, membership, published material, original contributions), falling short of required three criteria minimum and lacking sustained national or international acclaim.

Gourmet baker and cafe co-owner met leading role criterion only. AAO rejected awards as employer-level recognition, published material as non-major media, and exhibitions as commercial not artistic. Final merits unmet due to lack of sustained national or international acclaim.

A construction manager and vice president in China sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding the petitioner met only published material and leading role criteria but failed awards and original contributions claims due to factual inconsistencies and lack of field-wide impact.