Can chefs get an O-1B? What 29 AAO decisions say

Published AAO non-precedent decisions, 2005–2024 · updated 2026-10-16

Between 2005 and 2024 the AAO published 29 O-1B appeal decisions from culinary arts petitioners and sustained none of them. The most common ground for dismissal: awards not shown to be nationally or internationally recognized (6 of the 27 merits dismissals, 22%). Second: leading or critical role not established (4, 15%). 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

  1. 6 of 27 Awards not shown to be nationally or internationally recognized
    “The motion to reconsider was denied because the petitioner failed to demonstrate that the beneficiary's awards were significant national or international awards, as required by the regulation.” AAO, 2015
  2. 4 of 27 Leading or critical role not established
    “Furthermore, the petitioner failed to demonstrate that the beneficiary held a lead, starring, or critical role for organizations with a distinguished reputation.” AAO, 2023
  3. 3 of 27 Not shown to be among the small percentage at the top of the field
    “The director's initial error in citing the 'sustained acclaim' standard was deemed harmless as the correct criteria for 'distinction' in the arts were ultimately applied.” AAO, 2005

No O-1B appeal from culinary arts petitioners was sustained in this period. The record shows what did not work; it does not show what would.

Outcomes by Year

YearDismissedSustainedRemandedTotal
20244 (—)004
20232 (—)002
20222 (—)002
20182 (—)002
20171 (—)001
20152 (—)002
20131 (—)001
20112 (—)002
20103 (—)003
20058 (—)008

Criteria Breakdown

CriterionIn DismissedIn SustainedTotalDismissal Rate
Leading or critical role31031100.0%
Awards or prizes22022100.0%
Significant recognition16016—
High salary or remuneration12012—

Example Decisions

Dismissed2024-12-18The appeal was dismissed because the petitioner failed to establish that the beneficiary met at least three of the required evidentiary criteria. Specifically, for the 'lead or starring role' criterion, the petitioner… Dismissed2024-08-28The motion to reconsider was dismissed because the petitioner failed to establish that the prior AAO decision was based on an incorrect application of law or policy. The petitioner repeated the same claims and arguments… Dismissed2024-07-24The appeal was dismissed because the petitioner failed to prove the beneficiary met the minimum of three evidentiary criteria for extraordinary ability in the arts. The evidence submitted for the 'lead or starring role'… Dismissed2024-02-22The appeal was dismissed because the petitioner failed to meet the evidentiary criteria for extraordinary ability in the arts. The Director found significant credibility issues with the submitted documentation, noting… Dismissed2023-08-14The appeal was dismissed because the petitioner did not establish that the beneficiary met the evidentiary criteria for extraordinary ability in the arts. The evidence submitted for a bronze medal was insufficient to…

Sample: published AAO non-precedent decisions collected from uscis.gov, 2005–2024. These are appeals, not all USCIS adjudications; approval rates here are not initial-filing approval rates. Read our full methodology.

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