Athletics (Hockey Referee)
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 Athletics (Hockey Referee) (Sports), 2024. The appeal was appeal dismissed, and on the final-merits determination the petitioner did not clearly meet the standard. Of the regulatory criteria, 1 were counted: Leading role; not counted: Membership, Judging, Original contribution, Exhibitions.
What this case shows
Bottom line: the EB-1A denial stands. Of the 5 EB-1A criteria claimed, 1 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 counted
- Original contributionnot counted
- Scholarly authorshipnot claimed
- Exhibitionsnot counted
- Leading rolecounted
- High remunerationnot claimed
- 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.
Judging
Across the appeals base this criterion was argued in 659 cases and counted in 491 (75%). Typical AAO objection: "Judging not actually performed / proven". Counted when the judging actually happened: an invitation plus proof you reviewed others’ work.
Original contribution
Across the appeals base this criterion was argued in 642 cases and counted in 105 (16%). Typical AAO objection: "Original contribution: impact not shown". Counted when the contribution’s impact is shown: adoption, citation, use by others.
Exhibitions
Across the appeals base this criterion was argued in 226 cases and counted in 149 (66%). Counts showing work at artistic exhibitions, with venue, dates and proof of participation.
The Sports field in the database: 133 appeals
Outcomes in this field: 3 sustained, 17 remanded, 113 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 | 18 of 94 (19%) | breakdowns for this criterion (6) |
| Judging | not counted | 32 of 62 (52%) | breakdowns for this criterion (7) |
| Original contribution | not counted | 1 of 57 (2%) | breakdowns for this criterion (7) |
| Exhibitions | not counted | 1 of 12 (8%) | breakdowns for this criterion (6) |
| Leading role | counted | 21 of 68 (31%) | breakdowns for this criterion (7) |
Counted over our base of published AAO decisions; all Sports appeals.
From the AAO decision (source, EN)
The petitioner failed to meet the initial evidence requirements for extraordinary ability, either through a one-time achievement or by meeting at least three of the ten evidentiary criteria. Specifically, the petitioner did not demonstrate outstanding achievements required for membership in the Ice Hockey Federation of the Republic of Belarus, nor did they adequately demonstrate judging the work of others or making original contributions of major significance in their field.
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 April 30, 2024 (PDF, uscis.gov)AAO decisions archive on uscis.gov
FAQ on this case
- Which EB-1A criteria were counted in this case?
- Criteria claimed: 5, counted: 1 (Leading role); not counted: Membership, Judging, Original contribution, Exhibitions.
- 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: