Architecture and Urban Design
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 Architecture and Urban Design (Arts), 2025. The appeal was case remanded, and on the final-merits determination the petitioner did not clearly meet the standard. Of the regulatory criteria, 3 were counted: Judging, Scholarly authorship, High remuneration; not counted: Membership, Leading role, Commercial success, Comparable evidence.
What this case shows
Bottom line: the case went back to the officer for another look, not a final decision. Of the 7 EB-1A criteria claimed, 3 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
- Judgingcounted
- Original contributionnot claimed
- Scholarly authorshipcounted
- Exhibitionsnot claimed
- Leading rolenot counted
- High remunerationcounted
- Commercial successnot counted
- Comparable evidencenot counted
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.
Commercial success
Across the appeals base this criterion was argued in 81 cases and counted in 9 (11%). Counts commercial success in the performing arts with numbers: box office, sales, charts.
Comparable evidence
Across the appeals base this criterion was argued in 64 cases and counted in 1 (2%).
The Arts field in the database: 343 appeals
Outcomes in this field: 12 sustained, 52 remanded, 279 dismissed. How the AAO ruled in this field on the criteria argued in this case:
| Criterion | In this case | Counted in the field | How objections were answered |
|---|---|---|---|
| Membership | not counted | 15 of 126 (12%) | breakdowns for this criterion (6) |
| Judging | counted | 117 of 162 (72%) | breakdowns for this criterion (7) |
| Scholarly authorship | counted | 17 of 41 (41%) | breakdowns for this criterion (6) |
| Leading role | not counted | 45 of 161 (28%) | breakdowns for this criterion (7) |
| High remuneration | counted | 11 of 80 (14%) | breakdowns for this criterion (7) |
| Commercial success | not counted | 6 of 53 (11%) | - |
| Comparable evidence | not counted | 0 of 17 (0%) | - |
Counted over our base of published AAO decisions; all Arts appeals.
From the AAO decision (source, EN)
The initial denial was based on the petitioner not meeting at least three of the regulatory criteria. The AAO found the petitioner met three criteria (judging, scholarly articles, and high salary) and remanded the case for a final merits determination to assess sustained national or international acclaim.
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 February 5, 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: 7, counted: 3 (Judging, Scholarly authorship, High remuneration); not counted: Membership, Leading role, Commercial success, Comparable evidence.
- How did this appeal end?
- The case was remanded: the AAO withdrew the decision and sent it back to the officer - not a final approval, but not a final denial either.
- 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: