This appeal was not successful at this stage
The AAO dismissed the appeal because the Petitioner failed to establish that the Beneficiary met even one of the three required evidentiary criteria. The sole criterion fully analyzed — membership in associations requiring outstanding achievements — was not supported by adequate documentation showing that membership required outstanding achievements judged by recognized national or international experts.
3 more criteria would trigger a full merits review.
A university sought to extend the O-1A status of a beneficiary employed as an assistant coach. The Vermont Service Center Director denied the petition after finding that none of the three claimed evidentiary criteria were met. On appeal, the AAO analyzed the membership criterion in detail and found that while the Beneficiary's participation in a professional league 'Dream Team' was documented, the Petitioner never demonstrated that membership required outstanding achievements as judged by recognized national or international experts. The AAO also refused to consider three additional criteria and new evidence raised for the first time on appeal under Matter of Soriano. Because the Petitioner could not establish even one qualifying criterion, the minimum threshold of three was unmet and the appeal was dismissed.
What failed: 1. The Petitioner failed to submit promised membership documentation (badges, letters, cards) at the initial filing stage, leaving a critical evidentiary gap. 2. Evidence confirming the Beneficiary's participation in the professional league Dream Team did not show that membership required outstanding achievements judged by recognized national or international experts. 3. Three additional criteria and supporting evidence were raised only on appeal and were categorically excluded from consideration under Matter of Soriano.
Takeaway: Petitioners must submit all supporting evidence at initial filing or in response to an RFE — evidence and new legal theories introduced for the first time on appeal will be disregarded entirely. For membership criteria, documentation must specifically show that the organization's selection process requires outstanding achievements and involves recognized national or international expert judges, not merely that the organization is prestigious or historically significant.
Cases like this are frequently used by attorneys when responding to RFEs or building initial petitions. The evidence patterns that worked (or failed) here directly reflect what USCIS officers look for when evaluating O-1A criteria.
● Evidence that moved the needle
- See summary above for details.
● Evidence that wasn't enough alone
- The Petitioner failed to submit promised membership documentation (badges, letters, cards) at the initial filing stage, leaving a critical evidentiary gap
- Evidence confirming the Beneficiary's participation in the professional league Dream Team did not show that membership required outstanding achievements judged by recognized national or international experts
- Three additional criteria and supporting evidence were raised only on appeal and were categorically excluded from consideration under Matter of Soriano.
Criterion-by-criterion breakdown
Membership in associations requiring outstanding achievement
Not metPetitioner failed to demonstrate that the professional league Dream Team required outstanding achievements of members as judged by recognized national or international experts.
Letters, programs, biographic material, articles, and a Wikipedia screenshot regarding the Beneficiary's participation with the professional league Dream Team — failed to show membership required outstanding achievements judged by recognized national or international experts
New letter and promotional material submitted on appeal — not considered because not presented to the Director before denial
Claims for judging, critical/essential capacity, and high salary criteria raised for the first time on appeal — not considered per Matter of Soriano
Completed
I-129 filed
Assistant coach at a university, formerly a professional athlete in a national-level professional league
Completed
Director — Denied
Initial decision: Denied.
Completed
Appeal to the AAO
Petitioner appealed to the Administrative Appeals Office for de novo review.
2021-04-05
AAO decision — Dismissed
The AAO dismissed the appeal because the Petitioner failed to establish that the Beneficiary met even one of the three required evidentiary criteria. The sole criterion fully analyzed — membership in associations requiring outstanding achievements — was not supported by adequate documentation showing that membership required outstanding achievements judged by recognized national or international experts.
If you're appealing a similar decision, I-290B must be filed within 30 days of personal service of the denial, or 33 days if mailed.
Find this useful? A coffee helps keep Case Reviewer free and ad-free.
Buy me a coffee