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.

All EB-1A appeals

case remandedBusiness20224 criteria counted

Business (Fund Management)

AAO appeal decision on the EB-1A talent visa

Updated: September 10, 2026Author: Alina Kanametova

This is a real, anonymized AAO appeal decision on the EB-1A immigrant visa, in the field of Business (Fund Management) (Business), 2022. The appeal was case remanded, and on the final-merits determination the petitioner did not clearly meet the standard. Of the regulatory criteria, 4 were counted: Judging, Scholarly authorship, Leading role, High remuneration; not counted: Published material about you.

What this case shows

Bottom line: the case went back to the officer for another look, not a final decision. Of the 5 EB-1A criteria claimed, 4 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 claimed
Published material about younot counted
Judgingcounted
Original contributionnot claimed
Scholarly authorshipcounted
Exhibitionsnot claimed
Leading rolecounted
High remunerationcounted
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.

Published material about you

Across the appeals base this criterion was argued in 793 cases and counted in 286 (36%). Typical AAO objections: "Outlet not shown to be major media"; "Published material not ABOUT the person". Counts coverage specifically ABOUT YOU in independent major or trade outlets, with publication details.

RFE breakdown: how to respond Criterion guide Evidence benchmarks PR-CY traffic snapshot for news site, Nov 2023 O-1 exhibit sample for a media article

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:

Criterion	In this case	Counted in the field	How objections were answered
Published material about you	not counted	35 of 85 (41%)	breakdowns for this criterion (7)
Judging	counted	44 of 64 (69%)	breakdowns for this criterion (7)
Scholarly authorship	counted	34 of 55 (62%)	breakdowns for this criterion (6)
Leading role	counted	57 of 91 (63%)	breakdowns for this criterion (7)
High remuneration	counted	19 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 Director failed to properly conduct a final merits determination, did not adequately explain the reasons for denial, and inappropriately weighed the lack of evidence for criteria not claimed by the petitioner. The decision needs to re-evaluate the totality of the evidence to determine if the beneficiary is in the small percentage at the very top of 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 March 11, 2022 (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: 4 (Judging, Scholarly authorship, Leading role, High remuneration); not counted: Published material about you.
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:

RFE: Published material about you

Terms in this case:RFE (request for evidence)final merits AAO (appeals office)

All EB-1A appeals O-1 / EB-1A criteria Analyze my case Which visa fits

Similar appeals

Same outcome in other fields

Talent visa for Business What is the US talent visa

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.