Procedural Rejections (Untimely Filing, Motions) for EB-1A

When an AAO dismisses your EB-1A petition without reviewing the merits of whether you qualify as a National Interest Waiver beneficiary, it is typically due to procedural failures. Unlike substantive rejections where the AAO evaluates which criteria your evidence satisfies, procedural rejections occur when administrative requirements are not met.

What Counts as Procedural Rejection

Procedural rejections in EB-1A cases most commonly fall into two categories:

Untimely Filing

Petitions filed after the statutory deadline will be rejected regardless of substantive merit. The AAO has explicitly stated that untimely filings are dismissed without merits review.

Decision ID Outcome Key Finding ------------- --------- ------------- Dec072010_03B2203 Rejected "What the AAO found missing: timely filing of the petition" Apr202012_04B2203 Rejected "No substantive merits were considered" due to untimely filing Dec022008_01B2203 Dismissed Flagged as procedural_zero_criteria

The statutory deadline for EB-1A petitions is 15 calendar days from receipt of the I-140 petition. Late filings result in automatic dismissal, making timely submission one of the most critical procedural requirements.

Motions and New Evidence

When filing a motion to reopen or reconsider an EB-1A petition, you must submit genuinely new evidence that qualifies under the EB-1A criteria. The AAO has rejected motions based on:

Common Mistakes:

• Reusing prior submissions as "new" evidence (APR062020_05B2203)

• Submitting evidence that does not meet the specific qualifications for each criterion

• Failing to demonstrate how new evidence satisfies the EB-1A standards

The AAO has held: "A motion must contain genuinely new, qualifying evidence; prior submissions cannot be reused." (APR062020_05B2203)

Missing Final Merits Analysis

Even when a petition meets the three-criteria threshold required to trigger final merits review (Step 2), some AAO decisions have been dismissed without performing this analysis:

Decision ID Outcome Key Finding ------------- --------- ------------- AUG012025_02B2203 Dismissed "No evidence demonstrating sustained national or international acclaim" despite meeting four criteria APR142005_02B2203 Rejected Multiple evidentiary deficiencies including lack of independent proof for awards

The AAO may skip final merits review if the petition fails to provide convincing evidence that petitioner is among those who are "among the small percentage who have made original contributions" (Step 2 analysis requirement).

Source Note

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