Published AAO appeal decisions

Professional auto racing team petitioned for an engineer employed since 2016. Petitioner met three evidentiary criteria but AAO found the totality of evidence insufficient to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or position among the very top of the field of automotive engineering.

An entrepreneur seeking EB-2 NIW classification failed to establish advanced degree status and exceptional ability. The AAO found his proposed endeavor in food service entrepreneurship and business advisory services lacked national importance. The specific work would not impact the field or restaurant industry broadly and showed no significant potential for U.S. job creation.

Entrepreneur with advanced degree sought NIW for proposed real estate and business holding company. AAO affirmed dismissal, finding the ventures lack the national importance required under Dhanasar's first prong. Submitted generalized economic articles did not demonstrate substantial positive economic effects rising to national importance level.

Children's book author sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. AAO found petitioner met three evidentiary criteria but director's final merits determination was incomplete and contradictory. AAO remanded case for director to conduct full analysis of all evidence and provide complete explanation for any denial.

Visual artist and illustrator claiming extraordinary ability. Met two of ten criteria but failed to meet three required. Leading role and high salary claims rejected due to lack of organization documentation and insufficient earnings evidence. Record showed skilled artist with recognition but not sustained acclaim at required level.

Education administrator with foreign master's degree and baccalaureate sought EB-2 advanced degree or exceptional ability classification with national interest waiver. AAO affirmed director finding petitioner lacked five years progressive experience in specialty and failed three exceptional ability criteria; did not reach waiver analysis.

General and operations manager applied for NIW under EB-2 with advanced degree. Petitioner proposed consulting services for general operations management and entrepreneurship. AAO affirmed Director's finding that while work had substantial merit, it lacked national importance; no evidence showed broader field impact or substantial positive economic effects for U.S. economy.

Information technology professional sought national interest waiver for EB-2 classification. AAO dismissed appeal, finding petitioner failed to meet exceptional ability requirement (at least three of six criteria). Petitioner met only two criteria; did not establish license, comparable evidence, high salary, or recognition by peers. National interest waiver analysis not reached due to lack of prerequisite EB-2 qualification.

A recruitment consultant with an advanced degree sought EB-2 classification with national interest waiver. The AAO affirmed the petitioner qualifies as an advanced degree professional but found the proposed recruitment work, though having substantial merit, lacks national importance without sufficient documentary evidence of prospective broader economic impact.

A Chinese company manager petitioned for EB-1A classification claiming extraordinary ability. The applicant met two criteria (published material and leading role) but not the three required. On appeal, the membership criterion was rejected because the associations did not require outstanding achievements. The appeal was dismissed.

International law attorney filed 15th combined motion to reopen and reconsider EB-1A denial. Motion fails procedural requirements for reopening; newly submitted evidence post-dates petition filing and does not demonstrate eligibility at time of filing. Prior dismissal affirmed across multiple motions. Motion dismissed.

A nurse seeks national interest waiver for EB-2 classification. She claimed her proposed nursing work has substantial merit and national importance. The AAO held the endeavor lacks national importance because it would only serve her immediate patients and employers, without demonstrating broader implications for nursing or healthcare fields as required.

IT specialist seeking NIW to fill gap in skilled professionals. Petitioner established substantial merit but failed to demonstrate national importance; tentative job offers in project leadership lack documentary evidence of broader field impact beyond employer benefit.

An entrepreneur and real estate developer seeks NIW for EB-2 based on business development and project management skills in real estate. The AAO dismissed, finding the proposed endeavor lacks national importance; developing 20 housing units in one Florida location does not have prospective impact commensurate with national importance or substantial positive economic effects.

Athlete and coach in combat sport claimed extraordinary ability through five evidentiary criteria. AAO found he met only the awards criterion but failed the published material and membership criteria. Lacking three qualifying criteria, petitioner did not satisfy initial evidence requirement and did not demonstrate sustained acclaim at the top of the field.

Mental health assistant sought NIW as EB-2 exceptional ability individual. AAO affirmed petitioner failed to meet three evidentiary criteria required for exceptional ability, lacking official academic records, relevant degree, and salary documentation. Dhanasar framework analysis not reached.

Media production agency petitioned for O-1A classification for senior vice president of production finance. AAO dismissed motions, finding only one criterion met and insufficient documentation of membership in associations requiring outstanding achievements judged by recognized experts.

A physical education specialist met three evidentiary criteria but failed the final merits analysis. The AAO found his peer review experience, publication record, and conference participation insufficient to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim among the top tier.

An entrepreneur claiming exceptional ability and NIW sought to provide IT and business services. The AAO affirmed dismissal, finding his proposed endeavor had substantial merit but lacked national importance and would not impact the IT industry broadly or create substantial economic effects.

A cancer biology researcher with a Ph.D. sought a national interest waiver for EB-2 classification to conduct research on targeted cancer therapies. The AAO sustained the appeal, finding all three Dhanasar prongs satisfied: the research has substantial merit and national importance, she is well positioned to advance it, and the waiver benefits the United States.

Research analyst with advanced degree sought NIW for EB-2 proposing research on preventing recidivism in juvenile detention facilities. AAO found beneficiary qualified for EB-2 but dismissed because proposed endeavor lacked sufficient evidence of national importance or broader field impact.

An entrepreneur seeking EB-2 NIW classification made willful misrepresentations about work experience, employment dates, and business achievements. The AAO found material falsifications regarding employment with companies and patented technologies that contradicted tax returns and prior statements. The petition was dismissed without addressing the Dhanasar framework.

Bank manager seeking national interest waiver. Director found substantial merit but denied on national importance grounds. AAO affirmed and additionally withdrew director's second-prong finding due to petitioner's inconsistent evidence about the proposed endeavor.

Executive producer in entertainment seeks EB-1A classification. Claimed four awards, published materials, leading role, and high salary. AAO found one award met criterion and director had already granted leading role criterion, but rejected claim of major internationally recognized award and found petitioner did not demonstrate extraordinary ability or sustained acclaim at top of field.

An anatomist and professor seeks EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. He claimed five criteria including awards, published material, and original contributions. The AAO found the Director met two criteria but failed to adequately analyze three others, requiring remand for proper analysis of specific evidence.