This appeal was not successful at this stage
The AAO dismissed the appeal because the Petitioner failed to overcome the Director's finding that a falsified support letter was willfully submitted as part of the visa petition. The AAO also noted an additional ground of ineligibility in that a company listed on the proposed itinerary had been dissolved years earlier.
3 more criteria would trigger a full merits review.
A fashion model agency filed an O-1B petition for a fashion model, which was initially approved but later revoked after USCIS discovered that a key support letter bore the signature of an individual who had not worked for the signing company since 2012. On appeal, the agency argued the wrong signature stamp was used accidentally due to staff confusion, but the AAO found this explanation insufficient to overcome the finding of willful misrepresentation. The AAO also noted that employment contracts on the itinerary had suspiciously identical signatures across multiple petitions, and that one of the companies listed on the itinerary had been dissolved years before. Because the Petitioner could not credibly explain or cure the document integrity problems, the appeal was dismissed without reaching the merits of the beneficiary's extraordinary ability.
What failed: 1. The agency submitted a support letter stamped with the name of a former employee, and could not produce an original letter from the correct authorized signatory specifically covering this beneficiary. 2. Employment contracts on the itinerary appeared to have been mass-produced or altered, as signatures matched across multiple unrelated petitions. 3. One employer listed on the itinerary had been legally dissolved years before the petition was filed, calling into question the authenticity of the entire proposed work schedule.
Takeaway: Petitioners must ensure all supporting letters are authentic and verifiable; submitting letters with incorrect or unauthorized signatures — even accidentally — can constitute willful misrepresentation if the agency knew or should have known of the error. Always verify that companies listed on itineraries are active legal entities and that all signatures on contracts are genuine and traceable to currently authorized individuals.
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-1B criteria.
● Evidence that moved the needle
- See summary above for details.
● Evidence that wasn't enough alone
- The agency submitted a support letter stamped with the name of a former employee, and could not produce an original letter from the correct authorized signatory specifically covering this beneficiary
- Employment contracts on the itinerary appeared to have been mass-produced or altered, as signatures matched across multiple unrelated petitions
- One employer listed on the itinerary had been legally dissolved years before the petition was filed, calling into question the authenticity of the entire proposed work schedule.
Support letter stamped with the name of a former employee who had left the organization prior to the letter's date — USCIS confirmed the named signatory had not worked there since July 2012
July 2015 letter from the former employee submitted on appeal — did not reference this specific beneficiary and could not be verified as an original
Employment contracts on the itinerary — signatures appeared to exactly match those on other petitions for other beneficiaries, suggesting mass production or alteration
Petitioner's claim of accidental use of wrong signature stamp — insufficient to overcome finding of willful misrepresentation
Completed
I-129 filed
Fashion model
Completed
Vermont Service Center — Revoked
Initial decision: Revoked.
Completed
Appeal to the AAO
Petitioner appealed to the Administrative Appeals Office for de novo review.
2018-03-30
AAO decision — Dismissed
The AAO dismissed the appeal because the Petitioner failed to overcome the Director's finding that a falsified support letter was willfully submitted as part of the visa petition. The AAO also noted an additional ground of ineligibility in that a company listed on the proposed itinerary had been dissolved years earlier.
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