AAO Decisions — Page 13
Browse AAO decision summaries, with original USCIS sources. Archive page 13 of 16.
The AAO accepted nonacademic scholarly articles alongside judging and role evidence, then dismissed the appeal after a separate final-merits review.
Awards, media, and judging qualified, but the AAO found the entertainment professional’s overall recognition insufficient at final merits and dismissed the appeal.
The AAO dismissed both second motions after repeated contributions and evidence arguments failed to address the prior motion decision. Read the source.
The AAO added salary credit, withdrew media credit, and retained judging, leaving two criteria despite substantial pharmacy and community accomplishments.
The AAO dismissed the appeal after finding that the runner had not established the claimed criteria or shown sustained acclaim.
Read Aug212012_01B2203, its procedural history, the AAO’s actual disposition, and page-linked corrections to the earlier summary.
The AAO accepted judging, personal media coverage, and critical role, then found the app developer’s cumulative record established extraordinary ability.
Judging and display were accepted, but awards, original contributions, and leading-role evidence did not establish a third category.
The AAO retained judging and authorship but affirmed the contributions denial. Read the 2024 findings on citations, presentations, letters, and an innovation used in Iran.
The AAO found unreliable or insufficient evidence for the jeweler’s claimed association membership, awards, published material, scholarly authorship, and artistic display.
Four additional criteria failed on membership, influence, organizational role, and compensation-comparison evidence.
The AAO dismissed after finding no qualifying award or three criteria. It cited gaps in award recognition, press, field impact, role evidence, remuneration, and sales.
Read this corrected decision summary for Aug222012_01B2203, with the original disposition, source passages, and USCIS PDF.
Judging remained accepted, but later achievements and internship documentation did not cure the original petition’s eligibility gaps. Both motions were denied.
Authorship and a leading or critical role were accepted. Citations and another company’s use of a model did not establish the third category on this record.
Judging, authorship, and high salary met the threshold, but the AAO found the full record insufficient to show sustained acclaim at the top of the field.
Scholarly authorship was accepted, but the audiologist’s other evidence did not establish the initial threshold or a comparable-evidence basis.
Media and artistic display were accepted. Awards, associate membership, and instructional-video metrics did not establish a third qualifying criterion.
The AAO found fewer than three criteria, reviewed final merits, and corrected the director’s adverse finding about future U.S. work.
Published material and judging remained accepted, but original contributions and occupational salary comparisons did not establish a third category.
Judging and authorship were accepted; grant, media, contribution, and role evidence did not establish a third category.
The AAO rejected membership and high salary, reserved awards and role, and dismissed the appeal after four pursued categories could not yield three.
FMA and Boston Business Women records did not prove achievement-based admission. The AAO reserved contributions and leading role and dismissed the appeal.
The AAO minimally accepted scholarly authorship but found fewer than three criteria met and dismissed the appeal from revocation of the earlier approval.
The AAO found membership, judging, and scholarly authorship met the threshold, but withdrew the director’s leading-role finding and rejected awards and contributions claims.
The AAO reversed the award finding for a chess player, but membership and team-focused publicity did not establish the remaining threshold categories.
The AAO accepted artistic display but found other evidence insufficient; the appeal was dismissed because fewer than three criteria were met.
The AAO found options seminars did not establish judging or major contributions, the manual was unpublished, and remuneration was unverified.
Authorship and high salary stayed accepted, but the AAO found no third category after addressing remaining errors and contribution evidence.
Judging, authorship, and major-significance contributions were established. Detailed accounts of research use and independent citations also supported favorable final merits.
The AAO accepted the judging criterion for an Egyptian chef, but found the claimed award, membership, and published-material evidence deficient.
The AAO dismissed because fewer than three criteria were established. Club and student awards, post-filing media, unsupported field-wide contributions, and the team role did not establish the claims.
The AAO accepted judging, contributions, and scholarly articles, found the systems-and-control researcher satisfied final merits, and approved the petition.
The AAO accepted a chess-ranking award claim but found the record did not establish three criteria.
The AAO accepted a scholarly case study and critical role, correcting the Director’s zero-category finding, but found no third criterion established.
Mentoring documentation and a funded-project report did not cure the asserted judging and original-contribution deficiencies in this motion record.
The AAO dismissed the appeal in this non-precedent martial-arts case.
The AAO agreed that scholarly authorship was established but found too few criteria overall and dismissed the appeal.
The AAO accepted scholarly authorship but rejected awards, memberships, media, judging, and major-contribution claims.
Read this corrected decision summary for Aug252009_03B2203, with the original disposition, source passages, and USCIS PDF.