This appeal was not successful at this stage
The appeal was dismissed because the Petitioner failed to contest two of the three grounds for denial — the lack of a sufficient contract and the failure to demonstrate the nature of events/activities — which were each independently dispositive. The AAO declined to reach the evidentiary criteria arguments.
3 more criteria would trigger a full merits review.
The Vermont Service Center denied this O-1A petition for a basketball player on three grounds: insufficient contract, failure to document events/activities, and failure to satisfy at least three evidentiary criteria. On appeal, the Petitioner only addressed the third ground (evidentiary criteria) and did not contest the contract or event documentation deficiencies. The AAO held that by failing to address the first two grounds, the Petitioner waived them. Because those waived grounds were each independently dispositive, the AAO dismissed the appeal without reaching the merits of the evidentiary criteria arguments. The case underscores that all bases for denial must be contested on appeal or they are deemed waived.
What failed: The petitioner failed to address — and therefore waived — two of the three independent grounds for denial on appeal: (1) the lack of a sufficient written contract as required by regulation, and (2) the failure to document the nature, dates, and itinerary of the beneficiary's events or activities. New evidence submitted on appeal was also disregarded because an RFE had already provided an opportunity to submit it.
Takeaway: When appealing a multi-ground denial, petitioners must explicitly address and rebut every ground cited by the Director, or those uncontested grounds will be deemed waived and can independently support dismissal. Always ensure a compliant written contract and detailed event itinerary are included in the initial filing or RFE response.
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 address — and therefore waived — two of the three independent grounds for denial on appeal: (1) the lack of a sufficient written contract as required by regulation, and (2) the failure to document the nature, dates, and itinerary of the beneficiary's events or activities
- New evidence submitted on appeal was also disregarded because an RFE had already provided an opportunity to submit it.
Completed
I-129 filed
Professional basketball player
Completed
Director — Denied
Initial decision: Denied.
Completed
Appeal to the AAO
Petitioner appealed to the Administrative Appeals Office for de novo review.
2023-01-24
AAO decision — Dismissed
The appeal was dismissed because the Petitioner failed to contest two of the three grounds for denial — the lack of a sufficient contract and the failure to demonstrate the nature of events/activities — which were each independently dispositive. The AAO declined to reach the evidentiary criteria arguments.
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.