Published AAO appeal decisions

Self-represented petitioner seeking extraordinary ability classification. Failed to specify erroneous conclusions in appeal or address director's findings. AAO summarily dismissed appeal under 8 CFR 103.3(a)(1)(v) for lack of specific identification of legal or factual errors.

Global positioning technology company petitioned to classify radio frequency module design engineer beneficiary as extraordinary ability immigrant. Claimed multiple criteria. AAO held beneficiary did not meet regulatory criteria and lacked sustained national or international acclaim for extraordinary ability classification.

Employer petitioned for dancer beneficiary claiming extraordinary ability as both athlete and performing artist. AAO held approval under lesser O-1 nonimmigrant standard does not establish eligibility under stricter EB-1A immigrant criteria and that beneficiary lacks sustained acclaim to qualify as extraordinary ability alien.

Biostatistician claimed five EB-1A criteria. AAO dismissed because petitioner failed to establish lesser nationally or internationally recognized awards, and other criteria claimed on appeal were insufficient to meet extraordinary ability standard.

Petitioner claimed five EB-1A criteria. AAO summarily dismissed appeal because counsel failed to identify specific erroneous conclusions of law or facts, providing only general recitations without addressing director's specific determinations.

A musician, guitarist, songwriter and producer filed for EB-1A extraordinary ability. Petitioner submitted album sales plaques but failed to establish they were primarily attributable to his work or constituted nationally recognized awards. The AAO found achievements not persuasively placed him significantly above almost all others in music field.

Artist seeking EB-1A classification for extraordinary ability claimed to meet regulatory criteria but failed to challenge director's denial, provide specific responses to findings, or submit promised brief and evidence within required timeframe. Appeal dismissed.

Attorney seeking extraordinary ability claimed eligibility through committee membership and media mentions of legal transactions. Decision found membership based on employment rather than achievement and articles about transactions rather than petitioner, failing to demonstrate top-tier acclaim.

Chairman of corporation claimed extraordinary ability in business and argued criteria more difficult for business executives. AAO found membership in professional association did not require outstanding achievement as essential condition and evidence did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim. Appeal dismissed.

Scientist seeking extraordinary ability in sciences lacked advanced degrees and established modest credentials below highest field level. Self-published work, limited judging experience at university, and unsubstantiated membership claims failed to demonstrate sustained acclaim required.

A former Romanian swimmer who won Olympic and national medals and competed internationally seeks EB-1A classification. AAO held she did not sustain her past acclaim as a swimmer through subsequent coaching work, failing to demonstrate extraordinary ability at the very top of the field.

A fine antique jewelry and goldsmith restoration specialist filed EB-1A seeking extraordinary ability classification. AAO held she failed to submit sufficient documentation, met no regulatory criteria, and did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim at the top of her field.

A performance artist in the arts sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. AAO held she did not meet the awards criterion because her regional award was not nationally recognized, failed on published material evidence, and lacked three qualifying criteria for sustained international acclaim.

Violinist claimed EB-1A extraordinary ability in music, citing accomplishments including display and leading role. AAO found only two criteria met but held the evidence collectively insufficient to demonstrate sustained acclaim at the very top of the field, so dismissed the appeal.

Scientist claimed EB-1A extraordinary ability, citing research grant and memberships in Sigma Xi and IEEE. AAO found neither awards nor memberships satisfied criteria due to their standard requirements and large membership bases, then dismissed appeal for insufficient evidence of top-level acclaim.

Actress claimed EB-1A extraordinary ability, citing soap opera appearances in Latin America. AAO rejected all criteria—awards, published material, original contributions, leading role, and commercial success—and dismissed appeal, finding evidence insufficient to demonstrate sustained acclaim.

Ballroom dancer claimed EB-1A extraordinary ability. AAO found only one criterion met and rejected claims about one-time achievement and additional criteria. Dismissed appeal, holding evidence insufficient to demonstrate sustained acclaim at the field's very top.

Mountain climber and instructor sought EB-1A extraordinary ability. Claimed lesser awards and published material criteria. AAO found 1996-1997 certificates too remote for sustained acclaim, no instructor awards or student recognition, published material insufficient. Past climbing success not sustained through teaching.

Elvis performer sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Claimed three criteria: lesser awards, published material, and high salary. AAO found no nationally recognized prize, one article insufficient for sustained acclaim, no salary documentation. Petition lacks evidence of sustained acclaim required for extraordinary ability.

Creative producer and writer sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Petitioner claimed and submitted evidence for awards and judging criteria. AAO affirmed denial, finding the Promax/BDA award lacked sufficient national or international recognition and volunteer judging service did not evidence sustained acclaim at the very top of the field.

Jewelry designer self-petitioner sought EB-1A extraordinary ability status. AAO upheld denial across awards, publications, contributions, and leadership criteria, finding solicited letters insufficient and routine duties inadequate for sustained national or international acclaim.

Colloid science researcher claimed extraordinary ability through peer review and published articles. AAO dismissed the appeal, finding peer review routine in the field and publications insufficient to demonstrate sustained acclaim or significant impact, failing to establish position among the very top.

Employer petitioned for scientist beneficiary claiming extraordinary ability in sciences. AAO upheld denial, finding one criterion met but three required; letters and salary evidence insufficient for major significance; failed to demonstrate beneficiary among small percentage at field top.

Self-petitioner sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Director denied for failure to establish sustained national or international acclaim. On appeal, counsel promised but failed to submit brief or evidence within 10 months. AAO summarily dismissed appeal for lack of specific argumentation.