EB-1A Appeals: Computer Science
Last updated 2026-09-02
The AAO dismissed 92.1% of EB-1A appeals from Computer Science petitioners in published non-precedent decisions from 2003–2024 (n=38). The criterion most often at issue was Original contributions of major significance.
Outcomes by Year
| Year | Dismissed | Sustained | Remanded | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | 5 (—) | 0 | 1 | 6 |
| 2022 | 1 (—) | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 2021 | 5 (—) | 0 | 0 | 5 |
| 2020 | 4 (—) | 0 | 0 | 4 |
| 2019 | 2 (—) | 1 | 0 | 3 |
| 2018 | 2 (—) | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| 2017 | 3 (—) | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| 2016 | 4 (—) | 1 | 0 | 5 |
| 2015 | 2 (—) | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| 2007 | 2 (—) | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| 2005 | 2 (—) | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| 2003 | 1 (—) | 0 | 0 | 1 |
Criteria Breakdown
| Criterion | In Dismissed | In Sustained | Total | Dismissal Rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Original contributions of major significance | 24 | 1 | 26 | 92.3% |
| Authorship of scholarly articles | 22 | 2 | 25 | 88.0% |
| Judging | 22 | 2 | 24 | 91.7% |
| Prizes or awards | 17 | 0 | 17 | — |
| Membership in associations | 15 | 1 | 16 | — |
| Leading or critical role | 12 | 1 | 14 | — |
Example Decisions
Sustained2016-04-25The appeal was sustained because the petitioner provided additional evidence on appeal to meet a third regulatory criter
Sustained2019-06-28The appeal was sustained because the AAO determined the petitioner met a third evidentiary criterion, 'leading or critic
Dismissed2015-04-27The appeal was dismissed because the petitioner failed to provide sufficient evidence to meet the minimum of three regul
DismissedWL. 28, 2023The appeal was dismissed because the petitioner failed to demonstrate eligibility by meeting the minimum evidentiary req
Dismissed2022-07-11The appeal was dismissed because the petitioner failed to establish at least three of the required evidentiary criteria.
Dismissed2021-03-26The appeal was dismissed because the petitioner failed to establish that he met at least three of the required evidentia
Dismissed2020-09-24The appeal was dismissed because the petitioner failed to meet the required three evidentiary criteria. While the direct
Dismissed cases most often lacked published material specifically about the petitioner (not the employer or field generally); that contributions were of major significance in the field (not routine or incremental); sustained national or international acclaim in the final merits determination.
Sample: published AAO non-precedent decisions collected from uscis.gov, 2003–2024. These are appeals, not all USCIS adjudications; approval rates here are not initial-filing approval rates. Read our full methodology.
Get Your Free Strategy Preview →