Skip to content
All EB-1A appeals
case remandedIT20243 criteria counted

Business (Online Marketplace/Software Development)

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 (Online Marketplace/Software Development) (IT), 2024. 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: Original contribution, Scholarly authorship, 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 4 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

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.

The IT field in the database: 69 appeals

Outcomes in this field: 1 sustained, 11 remanded, 57 dismissed. How the AAO ruled in this field on the criteria argued in this case:

CriterionIn this caseCounted in the fieldHow objections were answered
Published material about younot counted17 of 45 (38%)breakdowns for this criterion (7)
Original contributioncounted11 of 55 (20%)breakdowns for this criterion (7)
Scholarly authorshipcounted43 of 55 (78%)breakdowns for this criterion (6)
High remunerationcounted18 of 36 (50%)breakdowns for this criterion (7)

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

From the AAO decision (source, EN)

Initially, the record did not establish that the Beneficiary had a major, internationally recognized award, nor did the Petitioner demonstrate that the foreign national met at least three of the ten regulatory criteria. The decision was remanded for a final merits determination after finding the petitioner met at least three criteria.

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 August 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: 4, counted: 3 (Original contribution, Scholarly authorship, 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:

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.