Why does the AAO dismiss EB-1A appeals from martial arts petitioners?

Not shown to be among the small percentage at the very top of the field (final merits) (48 of 143 merits dismissals); Awards not shown to be nationally or internationally recognized (38 of 143 merits dismissals)

Is the 92.8% dismissal rate the EB-1A approval rate for martial arts?

No. These are published AAO decisions on appeals of denials, not all USCIS adjudications. Approved petitions are never appealed, so the dismissal rate on appeal is not an initial-filing approval rate. It shows which arguments the AAO rejected and which it accepted.

Can martial artists get an EB-1A? What 166 AAO decisions say

Published AAO non-precedent decisions, 2000–2025 · updated 2026-10-16

Between 2000 and 2025 the AAO published 166 EB-1A appeal decisions from martial arts petitioners; 4 were sustained and 138 dismissed. The most common ground for dismissal: not shown to be among the small percentage at the very top of the field (final merits) (48 of the 143 merits dismissals, 34%). Second: awards not shown to be nationally or internationally recognized (38, 27%). What the sustained decisions had: awards with documented national or international recognition; contributions shown to be of major significance. These are appeals of denials, not all adjudications, so the dismissal rate is not an initial-filing approval rate; it shows which arguments the AAO rejected on appeal and which it accepted.

What the decisions say

Grounds for dismissal, by frequency

48 of 143 Not shown to be among the small percentage at the very top of the field (final merits)
“The AAO's analysis highlighted a discrepancy between the petitioner's acclaimed expertise as a martial arts competitor and her stated intent to work in the U.S.” AAO, 2014
38 of 143 Awards not shown to be nationally or internationally recognized
“The evidence provided did not establish that his awards were nationally or internationally recognized for excellence, nor did it prove that his memberships in martial arts associations required outstanding achievements as judged by experts in the field.” AAO, 2019

What the 4 sustained decisions had

1 of 4 Awards with documented national or international recognition
“The AAO found the petitioner met the criteria for prizes or awards, original contributions of major significance, and playing a leading or critical role.” AAO, 2013
1 of 4 Contributions shown to be of major significance
“The AAO found the petitioner met the criteria for prizes or awards, original contributions of major significance, and playing a leading or critical role.” AAO, 2013
1 of 4 Final merits: among the small percentage at the top of the field
“In the final merits determination, the AAO concluded the petitioner is one of the small percentage at the top of his field, as evidenced by his work coaching elite athletes for international competitions and developing innovative techniques.” AAO, 2013

Outcomes by Year

Year	Dismissed	Sustained	Remanded	Total
2025	2 (—)	0	0	2
2024	14 (—)	0	3	17
2023	11 (—)	0	0	11
2022	8 (—)	0	0	8
2021	10 (—)	0	2	12
2020	16 (—)	0	0	16
2019	9 (—)	0	0	9
2018	8 (—)	0	0	8
2017	6 (—)	0	0	6
2016	2 (—)	0	0	2
2015	5 (—)	0	0	5
2014	3 (—)	0	0	3
2013	1 (—)	2	0	3
2012	11 (—)	0	0	11
2011	2 (—)	0	0	2
2010	5 (—)	0	0	5
2009	11 (—)	0	0	11
2008	2 (—)	0	0	2
2007	1 (—)	0	0	1
2006	2 (—)	0	0	2
2005	8 (—)	2	2	12
2000	1 (—)	0	0	1

Criteria Breakdown

Criterion	In Dismissed	In Sustained	Total	Dismissal Rate
Prizes or awards	169	4	180	93.9%
Membership in associations	74	2	80	92.5%
Published material about the alien	65	1	71	91.5%
Judging	47	0	52	90.4%
Leading or critical role	42	2	46	91.3%
Original contributions of major significance	29	1	32	90.6%
Sustained national or international acclaim	19	0	21	90.5%
Motion to reopen/reconsider	20	0	20	100.0%
Artistic exhibitions or showcases	13	0	15	—
High salary or remuneration	11	0	11	—

Example Decisions

Sustained2013-10-29The appeal was sustained because the petitioner established eligibility under at least three of the ten regulatory criteria. The AAO found the petitioner met the criteria for prizes or awards, original contributions of… Sustained2013-12-12The appeal was sustained because the AAO found that the petitioner did meet the criterion for 'lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards,' which the Director had failed to consider in the initial… Sustained2005-11-21The appeal was sustained because the AAO found the petitioner's evidence satisfied at least three regulatory criteria. The petitioner demonstrated receipt of numerous national and international wrestling awards.… Sustained2005-11-21The appeal was sustained because the AAO found that the petitioner, a Greco-Roman wrestler and coach, met the evidentiary criteria. The decision highlights his national wrestling titles in Armenia and placements in… Dismissed2005-12-12The appeal was dismissed because the petitioner failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim. The AAO determined that the petitioner's awards were local or youth-level, not nationally or… Dismissed2005-10-12The appeal was dismissed because the petitioner failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim. The director determined the petitioner's awards were local or youth-level, not nationally or… Dismissed2009-10-19The appeal was dismissed because the petitioner failed to establish that the beneficiary had earned the necessary sustained national or international acclaim. The AAO found that the submitted awards, such as 'Best… Dismissed2009-10-19The appeal was dismissed because the petitioner did not establish the required sustained national or international acclaim. The AAO found a significant discrepancy between the petitioner's documented extraordinary… Dismissed2010-12-01The appeal was summarily dismissed because the petitioner failed to specifically identify any erroneous conclusion of law or statement of fact in the director's decision, as required. Counsel made a general claim of…

In sustained EB-1A appeals for Martial Arts petitioners, the AAO credited evidence such as awards shown to be nationally or internationally recognized in the field; contributions shown to be of major significance in the field (adopted or widely cited). Dismissed cases most often lacked that the awards were nationally or internationally recognized (not merely regional or local); published material specifically about the petitioner (not the employer or field generally); sustained national or international acclaim in the final merits determination.

Sample: published AAO non-precedent decisions collected from uscis.gov, 2000–2025. These are appeals, not all USCIS adjudications; approval rates here are not initial-filing approval rates. Read our full methodology.

Filing your own EB-1A? See how your CV maps to the criteria — free strategy preview.
Get Your Free Strategy Preview →