Business/Technology (Snow Removal & Sanitation Services, Invention)
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/Technology (Snow Removal & Sanitation Services, Invention) (Business), 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, Leading role, Commercial success; 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
- Awardsnot claimed
- Membershipnot claimed
- Published material about younot counted
- Judgingnot claimed
- Original contributioncounted
- Scholarly authorshipnot claimed
- Exhibitionsnot claimed
- Leading rolecounted
- High remunerationnot claimed
- Commercial successcounted
- 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.
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) |
| Original contribution | counted | 6 of 66 (9%) | breakdowns for this criterion (7) |
| Leading role | counted | 57 of 91 (63%) | breakdowns for this criterion (7) |
| Commercial success | counted | 1 of 2 (50%) | - |
Counted over our base of published AAO decisions; all Business appeals.
From the AAO decision (source, EN)
The Director's decision lacked a complete analysis and full explanation of the reasons for denial regarding several criteria, failing to adequately address submitted evidence and relying on general assertions about unreliable sources. The decision also improperly dismissed properly certified translations.
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 18, 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, Leading role, Commercial success); 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
- Business (General and Operations Manager)appeal dismissed, 2024
- Administrative Services Managementappeal dismissed, 2023
- Entrepreneurship, City Counseling, Philanthropyappeal dismissed, 2024
- Logistics Consulting/Businessappeal dismissed, 2025
- Administrative Services and Facilities Managementappeal dismissed, 2025
- Business (Big Data Center Consultant)appeal sustained, 2023
- Broadcast News Analysiscase remanded, 2022