Business (Marketing)
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 Business (Marketing) (Marketing), 2024. The appeal was case remanded, and on the final-merits determination the petitioner did not clearly meet the standard. Of the regulatory criteria, 0 were counted; not counted: Membership.
What this case shows
Bottom line: the case went back to the officer for another look, not a final decision. Of the 1 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 claimed
- 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.
The Marketing field in the database: 47 appeals
Outcomes in this field: 1 sustained, 12 remanded, 34 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 | 1 of 19 (5%) | breakdowns for this criterion (6) |
Counted over our base of published AAO decisions; all Marketing appeals.
From the AAO decision (source, EN)
The Director's decision lacked adequate explanation and analysis of the submitted evidence, failing to address the contents of documents or explain why they were insufficient. The RFE and denial contained mischaracterizations and overlooked relevant information, preventing a fair opportunity for the Petitioner to respond and hindering meaningful appellate review.
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 November 26, 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: 1, counted: 0; not counted: Membership.
- 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:
Related
Similar appeals
- Network Communications/Internet of Thingsappeal dismissed, 2023
- Journalism/Literature/Poetryappeal dismissed, 2020
- City Brandingappeal dismissed, 2023
- Marketingappeal dismissed, 2020
- Design and Marketing (Aircraft Livery)appeal dismissed, 2024
- Advertisingappeal dismissed, 2020
- Athletics (Handball)appeal dismissed, 2024