Visalytics
Visalytics
dismissed O-1 RFE Issued

Senior IOS Developer

Mobile Application And Software Development Business · 2024-11-13

Decision Date
2024-11-13
This case is from a USCIS Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) appeal decision. Appeal cases represent a subset of petitions and may not reflect typical outcomes.

Framework Evaluation

0 of 3 criteria met
Receipt of nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards for excellence (Not Met)

The Beneficiary's 2023 ItIt claims a award was not established as nationally or internationally recognized for excellence in the field, lacking evidence of the field's view of its significance or the objective measurement criteria used. Comparable evidence claims were not considered as they were raised for the first time on appeal.

Membership in associations requiring outstanding achievements of their members, as judged by recognized national or international experts (Not Met)

Membership in Grupo de Lideres Empresariais (LIDE I I) and Central Florida Brazilian American Chamber of Commerce (CFBACC) did not demonstrate that outstanding achievements were required for membership, nor that such achievements were judged by recognized national or international experts. The letters did not explain how the stated criteria were outstanding achievements or who judged them. Comparable evidence claims were not considered as they were raised for the first time on appeal.

Published material in professional or major trade publications or other major media about the alien, relating to the alien's work (Not Met)

A 2014 article was about mentoring for startups, not specifically about the Beneficiary's work. A 2023 article was submitted after filing, and self-authored articles were about his work, not 'about' him relating to his work, failing to meet the criterion.

Participation on a panel, or individually as a judge of the work of others (Not Met)

The Beneficiary's roles as a mentor in various programs (e.g., Project Incubator Program, Bootcamp of the Startup Program) were not considered equivalent to serving as a judge, as the documentation lacked specificity and detail to corroborate a judging role. New evidence pertaining to judging submitted on appeal was not considered.

Original scientific, scholarly, or business-related contributions of major significance in the field (Not Met)

Testimonial letters praised the Beneficiary's contributions to individual companies (e.g., web-based banking system, e-commerce platform, mobile app) but failed to explain how these constituted original contributions of major significance to the overall field, rather than just impact on employers/clients. The advisory opinion letter from D-H- did not detail specific evidence reviewed and is not binding. Comparable evidence claims were not considered as they were raised for the first time on appeal.

Why This Petition Was Denied

The appeal was dismissed because the Petitioner failed to establish the Beneficiary met at least three of the eight O-1 evidentiary criteria. Specifically, the 'awards' criterion was not met as the submitted award lacked national/international recognition for excellence and objective measurement criteria. The 'membership' criterion was not met as associations did not require outstanding achievements judged by experts. The 'published material about' criterion was not met as articles were either not about the Beneficiary, were submitted after filing, or were self-authored. The 'judging work of others' criterion was not met as mentoring roles were not equivalent to judging, lacking specificity and detail. Finally, 'original contributions of major significance' were not established, as testimonial letters made broad claims about company impact rather than field-wide significance and lacked specific details. Claims for high salary, scholarly articles, employment in a critical or essential capacity, and comparable evidence were not considered as they were raised for the first time on appeal or not pursued.

Request for Evidence (RFE)

Unsuccessfully Addressed

The RFE specifically noted the lack of evidence for the high salary criterion, and implicitly challenged other criteria (1-7). The Petitioner responded to the RFE by submitting additional evidence and arguments for several criteria, but did not claim eligibility for the high salary criterion at that stage. The AAO found the RFE response insufficient to establish eligibility for any of the challenged criteria.

RFE Targets
Receipt of nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards for excellenceMembership in associations requiring outstanding achievements of their members, as judged by recognized national or international expertsPublished material in professional or major trade publications or other major media about the alien, relating to the alien's workParticipation on a panel, or individually as a judge of the work of othersOriginal scientific, scholarly, or business-related contributions of major significance in the fieldhigh remunerationscholarly articlescritical employment role

Evidence

Evidence Types
Awards
Media Coverage
Reference Letters Dependent
Judging Experience
Original Contributions
High Salary
Professional Memberships
Commercial Success
Conference Presentations
Scholarly Articles
Critical Employment Role
Achievements
  • Receipt of a 2023 ItIt claims a award
  • Membership in Grupo de Lideres Empresariais (LIDE I I)
  • Membership in Central Florida Brazilian American Chamber of Commerce (CFBACC)
  • Membership in Strategic Consortium of Intelligence Professionals (claimed below, not pursued on appeal)
  • Published material about the Beneficiary in Jornal Estado de I I (2014 article)
  • Published material about the Beneficiary in Nossa Gente (2023 article)
  • Self-authored articles by the Beneficiary
  • Participation as a mentor in the Incubator of Projects Program at the I I School of Business
  • Participation as a mentor for technology startups with A-R-of I for Startups
  • Lectures on 'Development of Applications Practice' for Mobile Marketing class (2018)
  • Participation as a mentor in the '2019 1st semester Bootcam of the' program
  • Mentoring for the Silver Startup Program (2022)
  • Original contributions through software development and creation of a web-based banking system for I I
  • Original contributions through development of a new e-commerce platform for I bookstore chain
  • Original contributions through the I I roadside assistance mobile app
  • Roles as a thought leader, key speaker at major industry events, and publications in respected trade magazines (claimed as comparable evidence)
  • Creation of I I (claimed as comparable evidence)
  • Integrating complex IT solutions across different industries (claimed as comparable evidence)
  • High salary (claimed for the first time on appeal)
  • Scholarly articles (claimed on appeal, but not reached by AAO)
  • Employment in a critical or essential capacity (claimed on appeal, but not reached by AAO)

Similar Cases

Chief Executive Officer (CEO)

Artificial Intelligence · India

WeGreened O-1 approved
New York 11 days 2025-08-05
The petition was approved based on the petitioner's documented extraordinary ability in AI, supported by peer-reviewed publications and three patent applications. Evidence of 30 citations from independent researchers worldwide demonstrated the international reach and adoption of his findings. Additionally, his critical role as a CEO and his peer-review activity satisfied the O-1A criteria.
View Case

Research Fellow

Consulting

USCIS O-1 dismissed
2024-09-19
The appeal was dismissed because the Petitioner failed to demonstrate the Beneficiary met at least three of the eight O-1 evidentiary criteria. Specifically, the AAO found that published material about the alien was not met as the evidence only showed authorship or citations, not material *about* the alien. Original contributions of major significance were not established as citations were not shown to be unusually high or to represent major impact, and testimonial letters lacked specific detail on major influence. Critical employment roles were also not met as letters did not sufficiently elaborate on the significant importance of the Beneficiary's contributions to the organizations.

Musician

Music

USCIS O-1 rfe dismissed
California 2023-10-18
The appeal was dismissed because O-2 beneficiaries must be filed on a separate petition and the petitioner failed to meet the initial evidentiary requirements for O-1B classification. Specifically, the petitioner did not provide evidence of a significant national or international award and failed to satisfy at least three of the six regulatory criteria. The evidence provided for awards and commercial success (YouTube views and Spotify listeners) was not sufficiently documented to show sustained national or international acclaim.

Others

Entertainment · Colombia

USCIS O-1 rfe dismissed
2024-10-15
The appeal was dismissed because the Petitioner failed to demonstrate the Beneficiary met at least three of the six evidentiary criteria for extraordinary achievement in the motion picture or television industry. Specifically, the Petitioner did not provide adequate documentation for future lead/starring roles in distinguished productions, failed to show national/international recognition through major publications, did not establish future critical roles for distinguished organizations, and presented awards as certificates rather than published reports of commercial success. The AAO declined to review the Director's favorable finding on high salary or other criteria, as the overall threshold of three criteria was not met.

Frequently Asked Questions

A dismissed O-1 petition means USCIS found the evidence insufficient to meet the eligibility criteria. Common reasons include weak documentation, failure to meet the required number of criteria, or insufficient evidence of the claimed qualifications. Petitioners can refile with stronger evidence or explore alternative visa categories.

Browse More Cases

More dismissed cases More Software cases

Case data sourced from publicly available petition decisions and case studies. Decision date: 2024-11-13.

Browse all cases

At a Glance

Outcome dismissed
RFE Issued
Criteria Met 0 / 3
Evidence Types 11

O-1 Case Data

Scraped Case Data

Total Cases 90
Success Rate 70.0%
Sustained 63
Dismissed 27

Related Pages

O-1 Overview All O-1 Cases O-1 Dashboard

Get Case Insights

Compare your profile against thousands of real petition outcomes. Join the waitlist for personalized analysis.

Join Waitlist