AAO EB-1A decision AUG252020_07B2203: hairdresser / cosmetologist and eb-1a appeal strategy pitfalls

Decision Snapshot

Field Value --- --- Decision ID AUG252020_07B2203 Decision date 2020-08-25 Outcome dismissed Field or occupation hairdresser / cosmetologist Final merits discussed Yes

Criteria Discussed

• artistic_display

• awards

• high_salary

• judging

• leading_critical_role

• membership

• published_material

• scholarly_articles

Criteria Accepted

• artistic_display

• judging

Criteria Rejected

• awards

• high_salary

• published_material

• scholarly_articles

• membership

Core Lesson

Meeting only two EB‑1A criteria (e.g., artistic display and judging) is insufficient; petitions must provide strong, nationally‑recognized awards, high‑salary evidence, and properly documented professional membership to satisfy at least three criteria.

Evidence Issue

• National or international recognition for the awards claimed

• Salary evidence that demonstrates earnings are high relative to peers

• Complete English translation and evidence that UHCR membership requires outstanding achievement

• Major published material that is clearly about the petitioner

• Authored scholarly articles that satisfy the authorship criterion

• Petitioner did not raise the leading‑critical‑role claim on appeal, so the AAO did not consider it

How This Connects

This decision is part of Extraordinary's AAO EB-1A corpus. It is exposed as a structured decision card so readers, search engines, and AI search systems can connect the decision to broader EB-1A evidence patterns.

Source Note

Non-precedent AAO decisions are used as evidence examples. They are not binding authority and do not predict any individual case.