This appeal was not successful at this stage
The appeal was dismissed because the Petitioner failed to provide a required consultation from a person or organization with expertise in archaeology or archaeology business. A letter from a Turkish-American umbrella nonprofit (FTAA) was found insufficient as it lacked demonstrated expertise in the Beneficiary's field.
3 more criteria would trigger a full merits review.
An archaeology business petitioned for an archaeologist under the O-1A extraordinary ability classification. The petition was denied and the appeal dismissed because the Petitioner failed to provide a consultation from an appropriate U.S. peer group with expertise in archaeology. The Petitioner initially submitted letters from Turkish experts (inadmissible as non-U.S. experts) and then a no-objection letter from FTAA, the largest Turkish-American umbrella nonprofit. The AAO found that FTAA's experience in community advocacy and interdisciplinary business did not establish expertise in archaeology or archaeology business. Because the mandatory consultation requirement was not met, the AAO declined to address the extraordinary ability evidentiary criteria at all.
What failed: The consultation letters from Turkish experts were rejected because they were not from U.S.-based experts. The FTAA no-objection letter was rejected because FTAA is a Turkish-American community organization without expertise in archaeology or archaeology business. The argument that the Beneficiary's business activities justified a non-field-specific consulting organization was not accepted.
Takeaway: For O-1 petitions in specialized scientific or technical fields, the mandatory consultation must come from a U.S. peer group or individual with demonstrable expertise specifically in the beneficiary's field — community or cultural organizations, even well-established ones, will not satisfy this requirement. Petitioners should identify and engage a recognized U.S. professional association or credentialed expert in the specific discipline before filing.
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 consultation letters from Turkish experts were rejected because they were not from U.S.-based experts
- The FTAA no-objection letter was rejected because FTAA is a Turkish-American community organization without expertise in archaeology or archaeology business
- The argument that the Beneficiary's business activities justified a non-field-specific consulting organization was not accepted.
Completed
I-129 filed
Archaeologist
Completed
SCOPS — Denied
Initial decision: Denied.
Completed
Appeal to the AAO
Petitioner appealed to the Administrative Appeals Office for de novo review.
2025-05-21
AAO decision — Dismissed
The appeal was dismissed because the Petitioner failed to provide a required consultation from a person or organization with expertise in archaeology or archaeology business. A letter from a Turkish-American umbrella nonprofit (FTAA) was found insufficient as it lacked demonstrated expertise in the Beneficiary's field.
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.