Published AAO appeal decisions

Self-petitioner seeks EB-1A as financial manager in business. Met fewer than three regulatory criteria and lacked sustained national or international acclaim. AAO found evidence shows talent but does not demonstrate exceptional achievement setting petitioner significantly above others.

Self-petitioner seeks EB-1A as soccer coach. Petitioner's competitive playing career ended in late 1980s and no sustained national or international acclaim shown as coach. AAO found achievements significantly above others in field not demonstrated.

Athletic professional claiming extraordinary ability under EB-1A. Petitioner presented evidence of awards and achievements. AAO found the evidence insufficient to establish sustained national or international acclaim or placement in the very top of the field, dismissing the appeal.

An acrobatic performer sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The petitioner claimed at least three evidentiary categories. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding awards not nationally or internationally recognized and evidence insufficient to demonstrate the petitioner ranks among the very top in the field.

Ballroom dancer and instructor seeking EB-1A classification via employer petition. Claimed awards and national team membership. AAO found insufficient evidence of nationally recognized awards and no proof team membership required outstanding achievements. Appeal dismissed; sustained acclaim not established.

A marketing and advertising vice president sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The petitioner claimed at least three criteria but the decision analyzed only the awards criterion, finding no documented receipt of nationally or internationally recognized prizes. The petition was dismissed because evidence did not demonstrate extraordinary ability.

A scientist claiming extraordinary ability in sciences. Appealing a denial, counsel asserted the petitioner met at least three regulatory criteria but offered only general assertions without specific evidence or addressing director's findings. AAO summarily dismissed for failure to identify specific errors or provide substantive appeal arguments.

Postdoctoral researcher in life sciences seeking extraordinary ability classification. Claimed multiple criteria including major award. AAO held petitioner did not meet three regulatory criteria and lacks sustained national or international acclaim required for extraordinary ability classification.

Medical director claimed six EB-1A criteria. AAO dismissed appeal because petitioner failed to establish sustained national or international acclaim or extraordinary ability. Director found petitioner did not satisfy any claimed criteria, and three criteria were abandoned on appeal.

Competitive swimmer claimed three regulatory criteria including awards and sought comparable evidence consideration. AAO dismissed because evidence does not establish that petitioner's achievements set her significantly above almost all others at national or international level.

Visual effects professional claimed extraordinary ability through multiple regulatory criteria and comparable evidence. AAO affirmed dismissal because petitioner failed to meet the high burden of demonstrating sustained national or international acclaim and belonging among the very top of the field, despite meeting high salary criterion.

A medical technology company petitioned for a senior scientist in nanotechnology and biomaterials. The beneficiary failed to demonstrate nationally or internationally recognized awards or sustained acclaim. The AAO found achievements not significantly above almost all others in the field at national or international level and dismissed the appeal.

A self-represented economics professor sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The petitioner failed to establish requisite sustained national or international acclaim through any of the regulatory criteria. The AAO found achievements not persuasively set him significantly above almost all others in his field and dismissed.

A neuroscientist filing for EB-1A extraordinary ability was denied. The petitioner established only the scholarly articles criterion but failed to meet three total criteria. The AAO found deficiencies in awards, published material about the applicant, and original contributions. The final merits determination concluded the evidence was insufficient for top-tier status.

An artist sought extraordinary ability classification, and counsel on appeal asserted that four criteria were met, covering awards, judging, exhibitions and commercial success. The appeal was summarily dismissed because counsel identified no specific error in the denial and the promised brief and evidence never arrived over fifteen months.

Postdoctoral research scientist sought EB-1A classification. Claimed at least three criteria including membership and published material. AAO found membership requirement unmet and published material evidence insufficient, and concluded overall evidence does not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim required for extraordinary ability.

Urban developer sought EB-1A classification. Claimed eligibility under awards criterion, arguing event venue selection constituted national acclaim award. AAO rejected argument, holding awards must be personally received by alien not derived from organizational affiliation, and found evidence insufficient for sustained national or international acclaim.

Business professional's petition for extraordinary ability lacked extensive documentation of sustained acclaim. Beneficiary claimed to meet at least three regulatory criteria but petitioner failed to establish major award or comparable evidence of highest tier recognition.

Chef petitioner claimed extraordinary ability in culinary arts. Director found awards and leading role criteria met but rejected published material and high salary criteria. AAO dismissed appeal, finding petitioner failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or placement in top percentage of field despite meeting two criteria.

Self-petitioner seeks EB-1A as synchronized swimmer. Lacks sustained acclaim post-2003 and clear evidence of continuing in area of extraordinary ability. AAO found achievements not significantly above others in field and no credible intent to continue work in expertise area in United States.

A physician and researcher sought extraordinary ability classification. The director denied the petition after reviewing nine criteria. On appeal, counsel offered only vague assertions of substantial evidence without identifying any specific error. The AAO summarily dismissed the appeal because no erroneous conclusion of law or fact was specifically identified.

Self-petitioner seeks EB-1A classification as a model. Claimed lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes. AAO found the competition not nationally or internationally recognized and did not establish sustained national or international acclaim or place among very top in field.

A molecular biologist sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The petitioner was denied because he failed to establish sustained national or international acclaim. His only award was a poster prize at a student-level conference lacking significant recognition. The AAO found he demonstrates talent but falls short of top-tier requirements.

Singer claimed extraordinary ability and met at least three criteria. AAO found the petitioner did not receive nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards for excellence and that evidence did not demonstrate sustained acclaim at the very top level. Appeal dismissed.

A writer sought EB-1A classification as an alien of extraordinary ability in the arts. The director denied the petition. On appeal, counsel offered only a general assertion of extraordinary ability, with no challenge to specific findings and no promised brief or evidence. The AAO summarily dismissed the appeal for failing to identify any error.