Skip to content
All EB-1A appeals
case remandedBusiness20243 criteria counted

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

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:

CriterionIn this caseCounted in the fieldHow objections were answered
Published material about younot counted35 of 85 (41%)breakdowns for this criterion (7)
Original contributioncounted6 of 66 (9%)breakdowns for this criterion (7)
Leading rolecounted57 of 91 (63%)breakdowns for this criterion (7)
Commercial successcounted1 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

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.