Skip to content
All EB-1A appeals
appeal dismissedBusiness20250 criteria counted

Accounting and Business Operations Management

AAO appeal decision on the EB-1A talent visa

Updated: Author: Alina Kanametova

This is a real, anonymized AAO appeal decision on the EB-1A immigrant visa, in the field of Accounting and Business Operations Management (Business), 2025. The appeal was appeal dismissed, and on the final-merits determination the petitioner did not clearly meet the standard. Of the regulatory criteria, 0 were counted; not counted: Membership, Leading role, High remuneration.

What this case shows

Bottom line: the EB-1A denial stands. Of the 3 EB-1A criteria claimed, 0 were counted. It never reached the final-merits stage: that requires at least 3 counted criteria.

EB-1A criteria in this case

  • Awardsnot claimed
  • Membershipnot counted
  • Published material about younot claimed
  • Judgingnot claimed
  • Original contributionnot claimed
  • Scholarly authorshipnot claimed
  • Exhibitionsnot claimed
  • Leading rolenot counted
  • High remunerationnot counted
  • Commercial successnot claimed
  • Comparable evidencenot claimed

Why these criteria usually go uncounted

The through-line of the appeals base: in 81% of decisions the AAO names the same problem - assertions not backed by sufficient evidence - and 45% of cases are lost at the final-merits totality assessment. Below is how each criterion not counted here fares across the whole base.

Membership

Across the appeals base this criterion was argued in 496 cases and counted in 58 (12%). Typical AAO objection: "Membership does not require outstanding achievement". Counted when membership requires outstanding achievement judged by experts, not just a fee.

Leading role

Across the appeals base this criterion was argued in 624 cases and counted in 256 (41%). Counted when the organization is known and the role is leading or key, per the org chart and letters.

High remuneration

Across the appeals base this criterion was argued in 346 cases and counted in 94 (27%). Counted when pay is compared to the professional and regional average, with a cited source.

The Business field in the database: 143 appeals

Outcomes in this field: 4 sustained, 33 remanded, 106 dismissed. How the AAO ruled in this field on the criteria argued in this case:

CriterionIn this caseCounted in the fieldHow objections were answered
Membershipnot counted6 of 53 (11%)breakdowns for this criterion (6)
Leading rolenot counted57 of 91 (63%)breakdowns for this criterion (7)
High remunerationnot counted19 of 65 (29%)breakdowns for this criterion (7)

Counted over our base of published AAO decisions; all Business appeals.

From the AAO decision (source, EN)

The petitioner failed to demonstrate that her salary was high relative to others in the field, specifically because the salary data provided did not apply to her actual position (Regional Accounting Manager, which included management responsibilities, not solely accounting).

The quote summarizes a fragment of the decision; the table above reflects the FINAL status of the criteria across all stages of the case (including ones conceded before the appeal), so the wording may not match one-to-one.

Full AAO decision of January 15, 2025 (PDF, uscis.gov)AAO decisions archive on uscis.gov

FAQ on this case

Which EB-1A criteria were counted in this case?
Criteria claimed: 3, counted: 0; not counted: Membership, Leading role, High remuneration.
How did this appeal end?
The appeal was dismissed - the denial stands. Most EB-1A AAO appeals end this way (~80% of our base).
Did the case reach the final-merits stage?
No - the case did not reach final merits: fewer than the required 3 criteria were counted.

The criteria not counted here - typical objections and how to respond:

Related

Similar appeals

Same outcome in other fields

This is an anonymized public decision of the USCIS Administrative Appeals Office (AAO), shown for reference. Not legal advice and not a guarantee of your own outcome; every case is decided on its own facts.