Part M - Nonimmigrants of Extraordinary Ability or Achievement (O)
Resources
59 FR 41818 (PDF) - Temporary Alien Workers Seeking H-1B, O, and P Classifications Under the Immigration and Nationality Act--Correction
8 CFR 103.2(a)(1) - Submission and adjudication of benefit requests
8 CFR 103.2(b)(19) - Notification
8 CFR 103.2(b)(8) - Request for Evidence
8 CFR 103.3 - Denials, appeals, and precedent decisions
8 CFR 214.1(c)(5) - Decision in Form I-129 or I-539 extension proceedings
8 CFR 214.1(l)(2) - Period of stay
8 CFR 214.2(o) - Special requirements for admission, extension, and maintenance of status (aliens of extraordinary ability or achievement)
8 CFR 214.2(o)(1)(i) - Aliens of extraordinary ability or achievement
8 CFR 214.2(o)(1)(ii)(A)(1) - Description of classifications, extraordinary ability
8 CFR 214.2(o)(1)(ii)(A)(2) - Description of classifications, extraordinary achievement
8 CFR 214.2(o)(1)(ii)(B) - O2 classification
8 CFR 214.2(o)(10) - Admission
8 CFR 214.2(o)(12)(ii) - Extension period
8 CFR 214.2(o)(13) - Effect of approval of a permanent labor certification or filing of a preference petition on O classification
8 CFR 214.2(o)(16) - Return transportation requirement
8 CFR 214.2(o)(2) - Filing of petitions
8 CFR 214.2(o)(2)(ii)(C) - Evidence required to accompany a petition
8 CFR 214.2(o)(2)(iv) - Other filing situations
8 CFR 214.2(o)(2)(iv)(B) - Services for more than one employer
8 CFR 214.2(o)(3)(ii) - Definitions
8 CFR 214.2(o)(3)(iii) - Evidentiary criteria for an O-1 alien of extraordinary ability in the fields of science, education, business, or athletics
8 CFR 214.2(o)(3)(iv) - Evidentiary criteria for an O-1 alien of extraordinary ability in the arts
8 CFR 214.2(o)(3)(v) - Evidentiary criteria for an alien of extraordinary achievement in the motion picture or television industry
8 CFR 214.2(o)(4) - Petition for an O-2 accompanying alien
8 CFR 214.2(o)(5) - Consultation
8 CFR 214.2(o)(6)(iii) - Approval and validity of petition
8 CFR 214.2(o)(6)(iv) - Approval and validity of petition
8 CFR 214.2(o)(7) - Notification of Decision
8 CFR 214.2(o)(8)(ii) - Automatic Revocation
8 CFR 214.2(o)(9)(ii) - Appeal of Revocation
8 CFR 248.1(a) - Change of Nonimmigrant Classification-General
8 CFR 248.3(a) - Requests by petitioners
8 CFR 248.3(g) - Denial of application
8 CFR 274a.12 - Classes of aliens authorized to accept employment
INA 101(a)(15)(O) - Extraordinary ability in arts or athletics
INA 101(a)(46) - Definition of “extraordinary ability” in the arts
INA 214(c) - Admission of nonimmigrants
Appendices
| O-1A Evidentiary Criterion | Relevant Examples and Considerations |
|---|---|
| Documentation of the beneficiary’s receipt of nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards for excellence in the field of endeavor.[1] |
Examples:
Considerations: While many scholastic awards do not have the requisite level of recognition, there are some Ph.D. scholarships or dissertation awards, for example, that are nationally or internationally recognized as awards for excellence such that they may satisfy the requirements of this criterion. Relevant considerations include, but are not limited to:
For example, an award available only to persons within a single locality, employer, or school may have little national or international recognition, while an award open to members of a well-known national institution (including an R1 or R2 doctoral university[2]) or professional organization may be nationally recognized. |
| Documentation of the beneficiary’s membership in associations in the field for which classification is sought, which require outstanding achievements of their members, as judged by recognized national or international experts in their disciplines or fields.[3] |
Examples:
Considerations: The petitioner must show that membership in the association requires outstanding achievements in the field for which classification is sought, as judged by recognized national or international experts. Associations may have multiple levels of membership. The petitioner must show that in order to obtain the level of membership afforded to the beneficiary, the beneficiary was judged by recognized national or international experts as having attained outstanding achievements in the field for which classification is sought. As a possible example, membership in the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) at the IEEE fellow level requires, in part, that a nominee have “accomplishments that have contributed importantly to the advancement or application of engineering, science and technology, bringing the realization of significant value to society,” and nominations are judged by an IEEE council of experts and a committee of current IEEE fellows.[4] As another possible example, membership as a fellow in the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AAAI) is based on recognition of a nominee’s “significant, sustained contributions” to the field of artificial intelligence, and is judged by a panel of current AAAI fellows.[5] Relevant factors that may lead an officer to a conclusion that the person's membership in one or more associations was not based on outstanding achievements in the field include, but are not limited to, instances where the person's membership was based:
|
| Published material in professional or major trade publications or major media about the beneficiary, relating to the beneficiary's work in the field for which classification is sought. This evidence must include the title, date, and author of such published material and any necessary translation.[6] |
Examples:
Considerations: Published material that includes only a brief citation or passing reference to the beneficiary’s work is not “about” the beneficiary, relating to the beneficiary’s work in the field, as required under this criterion. However, the beneficiary and the beneficiary’s work need not be the only subject of the material; published material that covers a broader topic but includes a substantial discussion of the beneficiary’s work in the field and mentions the beneficiary in connection to the work may be considered material “about” the beneficiary relating to their work. Moreover, officers may consider material that focuses solely or primarily on work or research being undertaken by a team of which the beneficiary is a member, provided that the material mentions the beneficiary in connection with the work, or other evidence in the record documents the beneficiary’s significant role in the work or research. In evaluating whether a submitted publication is a professional publication, major trade publication, or major media, relevant factors include the intended audience (for professional and major trade publications) and the relative circulation, readership, or viewership (for major trade publications and other major media). |
| Evidence of the beneficiary's participation on a panel, or individually, as a judge of the work of others in the same or in an allied field of specialization for which classification is sought.[7] |
Examples:
Considerations: The petitioner must show that the beneficiary has not only been invited to judge the work of others, but also that the beneficiary actually participated in the judging of the work of others in the same or allied field of specialization. For example, a petitioner might document a beneficiary’s peer review work by submitting a copy of a request from a journal to the beneficiary to do the review, accompanied by evidence confirming that the beneficiary actually completed the review. |
| Evidence of the beneficiary's original scientific, scholarly, or business-related contributions of major significance in the field.[8] |
Examples:
Considerations: Analysis under this criterion focuses on whether the beneficiary’s original work constitutes major, significant contributions to the field. Evidence that the beneficiary’s work was funded, patented, or published, while potentially demonstrating the work’s originality, will not necessarily establish, on its own, that the work is of major significance to the field. However, published research that has provoked widespread commentary on its importance from others working in the field, and documentation that it has been highly cited relative to other works in that field, may be probative of the significance of the beneficiary’s contributions to the field of endeavor. Similarly, evidence that the beneficiary developed a patented technology that has attracted significant attention or commercialization may establish the significance of the beneficiary’s original contribution to the field. If a patent remains pending, USCIS will likely require additional supporting evidence to document the originality of the beneficiary’s contribution. Detailed letters from experts in the field explaining the nature and significance of the beneficiary’s contribution(s) may also provide valuable context for evaluating the claimed original contributions of major significance, particularly when the record includes documentation corroborating the claimed significance. Submitted letters should specifically describe the beneficiary’s contribution and its significance to the field and should also set forth the basis of the writer’s knowledge and expertise. |
| Evidence of the beneficiary's authorship of scholarly articles in the field, in professional journals, or other major media.[9] |
Examples:
Considerations: In order to meet this criterion, the beneficiary must be a listed author of the submitted article(s) but need not be the sole or first author. In addition, a petitioner need not provide evidence that the beneficiary’s published work has been cited to meet this criterion.[11] In addition, the articles must be scholarly. In the academic arena, a scholarly article reports on original research, experimentation, or philosophical discourse. It is written by a researcher or expert in the field who is often affiliated with a college, university, or research institution and the article is normally peer-reviewed. In general, it should have footnotes, endnotes, or a bibliography, and may include graphs, charts, videos, or pictures as illustrations of the concepts expressed in the article. In non-academic arenas, a scholarly article should be written for learned persons in that field. In evaluating whether a submitted publication is a professional publication or major media, relevant factors include the intended audience (for professional journals) and the circulation or readership relative to other media in the field (for major media). |
| Evidence that the beneficiary has been employed in a critical or essential capacity for organizations and establishments that have a distinguished reputation.[12] |
Examples:
Considerations: To show a critical role, the evidence should establish that the beneficiary has contributed in a way that is of significant importance to the organization or establishment’s activities. To show an essential role, the evidence should establish that the beneficiary’s role is (or was) integral to the entity. A leadership role in an organization often qualifies as critical or essential. For a supporting role to be considered critical or essential, USCIS considers other factors, such as whether the beneficiary’s performance in the role is (or was) integral or important to the organization or establishment’s goals or activities, especially in relation to others in similar positions within the organization. It is not the title of the beneficiary’s role, but rather the beneficiary’s duties and performance in the role that determines whether the role is (or was) critical or essential. Detailed letters from persons with personal knowledge of the significance of the beneficiary’s role can be particularly helpful in analyzing this criterion. The organization need not have directly employed the beneficiary. In addition, the organization or establishment must be recognized as having a distinguished reputation. Relevant factors for evaluating the reputation of an organization or establishment can include the scale of its customer base, longevity, or relevant media coverage. For academic departments, programs, and institutions, officers may also consider national rankings and receipt of government research grants as positive factors in some cases. For a startup business, officers may consider evidence that the business has received significant funding from government entities, venture capital funds, angel investors, or other such funders commensurate with funding rounds generally achieved for that startup’s stage and industry, as a positive factor regarding its distinguished reputation. |
| Evidence that the beneficiary has either commanded a high salary or will command a high salary or other remuneration for services as evidenced by contracts or other reliable evidence.[14] |
Examples:
Considerations: If the petitioner is claiming to meet this criterion, then the burden is on the petitioner to provide appropriate evidence establishing that the beneficiary’s compensation is high relative to others working in similar occupations in the field. The following webpages, among others, may be helpful in evaluating the relative compensation for a given field:
Officers should evaluate persons working outside of the United States based on the wage statistics or comparable evidence for that locality, rather than by simply converting the salary to U.S. dollars and then viewing whether that salary would be considered high in the United States. For entrepreneurs or founders of startup businesses, officers consider evidence that the business has received significant funding from government entities, venture capital funds, angel investors, or other such funders in evaluating the credibility of submitted contracts, job offer letters, or other evidence of prospective salary or remuneration for services. |
Footnotes
[^ 1] 8 CFR 214.2(o)(3)(iii)(B)(1).
[^ 2] The Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education recognizes R1 and R2 doctoral universities as having “very high” or “high” research activity, respectively, based on publicly available federal government data regarding the number of doctoral degrees awarded and the amount of total research expenditures. See the Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education’s Basic Classification Description webpage.
[^ 3] 8 CFR 214.2(o)(3)(iii)(B)(2).
[^ 4] See the IEEE’s Steps to Become an IEEE Fellow webpage.
[^ 5] See the AAAI Fellows Program webpage.
[^ 6] See 8 CFR 214.2(o)(3)(iii)(B)(3).
[^ 7] See 8 CFR 214.2(o)(3)(iii)(B)(4).
[^ 8] See 8 CFR 214.2(o)(3)(iii)(B)(5).
[^ 9] See 8 CFR 214.2(o)(3)(iii)(B)(6).
[^ 10] While many articles accepted for presentation at conferences do not result in publication, there are conferences that peer review and publish accepted presentations in professional journals (sometimes called proceedings), such that they may qualify as scholarly articles under this criterion.
[^ 11] Instead, officers may consider citation evidence relating to the published work as part of the totality analysis to evaluate whether the record establishes that the beneficiary has sustained national or international acclaim and is among the small percentage at the top of the field. For instance, documentation regarding the total rate of citations to the beneficiary’s body of published work relative to others in the field may indicate a beneficiary’s high overall standing for the purpose of demonstrating that the beneficiary is among the small percentage at the top of the field.
[^ 12] See 8 CFR 214.2(o)(3)(iii)(B)(7).
[^ 13] See SBIR America’s Seed Fund webpage.
| O-1B Evidentiary Criterion: | Relevant Considerations |
|---|---|
| 1. Evidence that the beneficiary has performed, and will perform, services as a lead or starring participant in productions or events which have a distinguished reputation as evidenced by critical reviews, advertisements, publicity releases, publications, contracts, or endorsements.[1] |
Note: This criterion differs from the third criterion, which is specific to organizations and establishments.[2] This criterion requires evidence of:
Evidence may demonstrate a lead role by establishing that the person has a principal role in the event or production. A starring role means a position of great prominence relative to others in the event or production.[3] In evaluating the distinguished reputation of a past production or event, officers may consider factors such as favorable critical reception, high attendance levels, commercial success, or another indicator that the petitioner establishes would tend to distinguish the reputation of an event or production in the relevant field. With regard to demonstrating the distinguished reputation of a prospective event, a petitioner may submit documentation such as advance publicity, endorsements, or other evidence regarding the level of anticipation of the relevant event or production. However, as the available evidence relating to the reputation of a prospective production or event will often be limited, officers may also consider factors such as the reputation of similar past events or productions by the same individuals or entities. In evaluating whether the beneficiary’s participation in a past or future event or production qualifies as lead or starring, officers may consider, for example, whether the beneficiary’s role is highlighted or featured in advertisements, publicity releases, critical reviews, or other materials. The contractual terms offered to the beneficiary may also be relevant to establishing the lead or starring nature of the beneficiary’s participation, especially with regard to a prospective event or production. This criterion does not require that the beneficiary will have a lead or starring role in the specific U.S. events or productions for which O-1 classification is sought, or that such events or productions have a distinguished reputation. It is sufficient for the petitioner to otherwise demonstrate that the beneficiary has performed and will perform a qualifying role in a qualifying production within or outside of the United States. To meet this criterion, the petitioner must submit evidence in the form of critical reviews, advertisements, publicity releases, publications, contracts, or endorsements. Advertisements, publicity releases, and endorsements are promotional materials. Endorsements are public facing and serve a marketing purpose. This exhaustive list does not include unpublished testimonial or recommendation letters. |
| 2. Evidence that the beneficiary has achieved national or international recognition for achievements evidenced by critical reviews or other published materials by or about the beneficiary in major newspapers, trade journals, magazines, or other publications.[4] |
To meet this criterion, the petitioner must provide evidence that demonstrates the beneficiary is recognized for achievements nationally or internationally, in the form of:
The beneficiary and the beneficiary’s achievements need not be the only subject of the material in order to qualify as published material about the individual as described in this criterion. For example, published material that covers a broader production, exhibition, or topic, but includes a discussion of the beneficiary, or includes a discussion of the beneficiary’s work or achievement and mentions the beneficiary in connection to the work, may be considered material about the beneficiary. Material may be considered by the beneficiary even if the beneficiary is one of multiple authors. In determining whether the submitted evidence demonstrates that the beneficiary has achieved national or international recognition for achievements, officers consider both the content of the published material and the level of recognition enjoyed by the publication in which it appears. For example, favorable coverage or publication of the beneficiary’s work in major media, as demonstrated by high relative circulation, readership, or viewership figures, could establish national or international recognition of the beneficiary’s achievements. |
| 3. Evidence that the beneficiary has performed, and will perform, in a lead, starring, or critical role for organizations and establishments that have a distinguished reputation evidenced by articles in newspapers, trade journals, publications, or testimonials.[5] |
Note: This criterion differs from the first criterion, which is specific to productions or events.[6] This criterion requires evidence of:
Evidence may demonstrate a lead role by establishing that the person has a principal role in the organization or establishment. A starring role means a position of great prominence relative to others in the organization.[7] To show a critical role, the evidence should establish that the beneficiary has contributed or will contribute in a way that is of significant importance to the organization or establishment’s activities. Officers consider factors such as whether the beneficiary’s performance in the role has been or will be integral or important to the organization or establishment’s goals or activities, especially in relation to others in similar positions within the organization. Detailed letters from persons with personal knowledge of the significance of the beneficiary’s role can be particularly helpful in addressing this criterion. Letters and testimonials should provide as much detail as possible about the beneficiary’s role and the reputation of the organization or establishment and give the credentials of the author, including the basis of the author’s knowledge of the beneficiary’s role. In addition, the organization or establishment, or the relevant division or department within the entity, must be recognized as having a distinguished reputation. Relevant factors for evaluating the reputation of an entity or its department or division include, but are not limited to, the scale of its customer base, longevity, or relevant media coverage. The organization need not have directly employed the beneficiary. |
| 4. Evidence that the beneficiary has a record of major commercial or critically acclaimed successes as evidenced by such indicators as title, rating, standing in the field, box office receipts, motion pictures or television ratings, and other occupational achievements reported in trade journals, major newspapers, or other publications.[8] |
This criterion requires evidence in the form of publications establishing the beneficiary’s record of major commercial or critically acclaimed success. The publications may include print or online publications or transcripts of radio or video coverage. A submitted publication does not have to be primarily about the beneficiary and may be about a production in which the beneficiary performed. However, the record should demonstrate how the production’s major commercial or critically acclaimed success represents the beneficiary’s success. For instance, a petitioner might establish that a production’s success is in some way attributable to the beneficiary based on the significance of the beneficiary’s contributions. A publication reporting the commercial success of the beneficiary or the beneficiary’s work should reflect that the ratings, receipts, sales, revenue, standing, or other occupational achievement represent major successes in the relevant field. If demonstrating critically acclaimed success, the evidence should demonstrate that the beneficiary’s work has received public-facing praise or positive reviews in the relevant field, such as from professional art, television, or film critics. |
| 5. Evidence that the beneficiary has received significant recognition for achievements from organizations, critics, government agencies, or other recognized experts in the field in which the beneficiary is engaged. Such testimonials must be in a form which clearly indicates the author's authority, expertise, and knowledge of the beneficiary's achievements.[9] |
To meet this criterion, the evidence must establish the beneficiary has received significant recognition for one or more achievements from an organization, critic, government agency, or other recognized expert in the field. The word significant in this criterion modifies recognition rather than achievements. Accordingly, although the beneficiary must have one or more achievements, the significance of the recognition is based on who is recognizing the achievements. A testimonial written on behalf of an organization or government agency should explain the basis for the author’s knowledge including the author’s connection to the organization or agency, and the significance of the organization or agency within the relevant field. Likewise, a testimonial from a critic or a recognized expert should explain the basis of the author’s knowledge and describe the author’s credentials including the author’s expertise in the relevant field.[10] The author should also describe and explain the significance of the achievements the author is recognizing. In all cases, a submitted testimonial should detail any achievements that are being recognized by the organization, agency, or individual. However, the testimonial need not describe other types of recognition that the beneficiary has received for a noted achievement. Instead, the testimonial itself may qualify as significant recognition under this criterion when the significance of the recognizing organization, agency, or individual is established. |
| 6. Evidence that the beneficiary has either commanded a high salary or will command a high salary or other substantial remuneration for services in relation to others in the field, as evidenced by contracts or other reliable evidence.[11] |
To demonstrate that the petitioner meets this criterion, the petitioner should provide appropriate evidence establishing that the beneficiary’s past or future compensation is or will be high relative to others working in the field. When evaluating assertions regarding future compensation, officers may consider the credibility of submitted contracts, job offer letters, or other evidence of prospective salary or remuneration for services. Petitioners often submit wage surveys to show a comparison. Wage survey data, including but not limited to government wage survey data such as the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics, may be helpful in evaluating the relative compensation for a given field. When evaluating whether an accurate comparison is being made between the beneficiary’s documented remuneration and the remuneration in the survey, the following considerations, among others, may be relevant:
|
Footnotes
[^ 1] See 8 CFR 214.2(o)(3)(iv)(B)(1) and 8 CFR 214.2(o)(3)(v)(B)(1).
[^ 2] See 8 CFR 214.2(o)(3)(iv)(B)(3) and 8 CFR 214.2(o)(3)(v)(B)(3). A production or event includes examples such as: an art show or exhibit, concert, or theatrical production (for O-1B (arts)); or a film or television show (for O-1B (MPTV)). In contrast, an organization or establishment includes examples such as: a company, collective, or other entity, including but not limited to entities that produce artistic productions or events (for O-1B (arts)); or the production company or studio producing the film or television show (for O-1B (MPTV)).
[^ 3] Consistent with a plain language reading, a “lead” role generally refers to a principal role, while to “star” means to feature in the most prominent or important role. See Merriam-Webster Dictionary’s definition of “lead" and definition of “starring.”
[^ 4] See 8 CFR 214.2(o)(3)(iv)(B)(2) and 8 CFR 214.2(o)(3)(v)(B)(2).
[^ 5] See 8 CFR 214.2(o)(3)(iv)(B)(3) and 8 CFR 214.2(o)(3)(v)(B)(3).
[^ 6] See 8 CFR 214.2(o)(3)(iv)(B)(1) and 8 CFR 214.2(o)(3)(v)(B)(1). A production or event includes examples such as: an art show or exhibit, concert, or theatrical production (for O-1B (arts)); or a film or television show (for O-1B (MPTV)). In contrast, an organization or establishment includes examples such as: a company, collective, or other entity, including but not limited to entities that produce artistic productions or events (for O-1B (arts)); or the production company or studio producing the film or television show (for O-1B (MPTV)).
[^ 7] Consistent with a plain language reading, a “lead” role generally refers to a principal role, while to “star” means to feature in the most prominent or important role. See Merriam-Webster Dictionary’s definition of “lead" and definition of “starring.”
[^ 8] See 8 CFR 214.2(o)(3)(iv)(B)(4) and 8 CFR 214.2(o)(3)(v)(B)(4).
[^ 9] See 8 CFR 214.2(o)(3)(iv)(B)(5) and 8 CFR 214.2(o)(3)(v)(B)(5).
[^ 10] The regulation at 8 CFR 214.2(o)(2)(iii)(B) provides that affidavits written by recognized experts certifying to the recognition and extraordinary ability or extraordinary achievement of the beneficiary shall specifically describe the beneficiary’s recognition and ability or achievement in factual terms and set forth the expertise of the affiant and the manner in which the affiant acquired such information.
[^ 11] See 8 CFR 214.2(o)(3)(iii)(B)(6) and 8 CFR 214.2(o)(3)(v)(B)(6)
Updates
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) is issuing policy guidance in the USCIS Policy Manual to clarify how USCIS evaluates evidence to determine eligibility for the O-1B visa classification for nonimmigrants of extraordinary ability in the arts and nonimmigrants of extraordinary achievement in the motion picture or television (MPTV) industry.
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) is updating policy guidance in the USCIS Policy Manual to further clarify how USCIS evaluates evidence to determine eligibility for O-1A nonimmigrants of extraordinary ability, with a focus on persons in science, technology, engineering, or mathematics (STEM) fields.
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) is issuing policy guidance in the USCIS Policy Manual to clarify how USCIS evaluates evidence to determine eligibility for O-1A nonimmigrants of extraordinary ability, with a focus on persons in science, technology, engineering, or mathematics (STEM) fields, as well as how USCIS determines whether an O-1 beneficiary’s prospective work is within the beneficiary’s area of extraordinary ability or achievement.
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) is issuing policy guidance in the USCIS Policy Manual to clarify how USCIS determines whether an O-1B beneficiary is evaluated as a person of extraordinary ability in the arts (O-1B Arts) or as a person of extraordinary achievement in the motion picture or television industry (O-1B MPTV).
This technical update replaces all instances of the term “alien” with “noncitizen” or other appropriate terms throughout the Policy Manual where possible, as used to refer to a person who meets the definition provided in INA 101(a)(3) [“any person not a citizen or national of the United States”].
1 USCIS-PM - Volume 1 - General Policies and Procedures
2 USCIS-PM - Volume 2 - Nonimmigrants
6 USCIS-PM - Volume 6 - Immigrants
7 USCIS-PM - Volume 7 - Adjustment of Status
8 USCIS-PM - Volume 8 - Admissibility
9 USCIS-PM - Volume 9 - Waivers and Other Forms of Relief
10 USCIS-PM - Volume 10 - Employment Authorization
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) is issuing policy guidance in the USCIS Policy Manual to update and consolidate guidance related to O nonimmigrant classifications.
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) is revising its policy guidance in the USCIS Policy Manual to align with the Fee Schedule and Changes to Certain Other Immigration Benefit Request Requirements Final Rule, published in the Federal Register on August 3, 2020. This guidance becomes effective October 2, 2020. For information regarding implementation, see Appendix: 2020 Fee Rule Litigation Summary.
1 USCIS-PM A - Part A - Public Services
1 USCIS-PM B - Part B - Submission of Benefit Requests
2 USCIS-PM - Volume 2 - Nonimmigrants
7 USCIS-PM A - Part A - Adjustment of Status Policies and Procedures
7 USCIS-PM F - Part F - Special Immigrant-Based Adjustment
7 USCIS-PM M - Part M - Asylee Adjustment
11 USCIS-PM A - Part A - Secure Identity Documents Policies and Procedures
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) is updating and incorporating relevant Adjudicator’s Field Manual (AFM) content into the USCIS Policy Manual. As that process is ongoing, USCIS has moved any remaining AFM content to its corresponding USCIS Policy Manual Part, in PDF format, until relevant AFM content has been properly incorporated into the USCIS Policy Manual. To the extent that a provision in the USCIS Policy Manual conflicts with remaining AFM content or Policy Memoranda, the updated information in the USCIS Policy Manual prevails. To find remaining AFM content, see the crosswalk (PDF, 317.68 KB) between the AFM and the Policy Manual.
1 USCIS-PM - Volume 1 - General Policies and Procedures
2 USCIS-PM - Volume 2 - Nonimmigrants
3 USCIS-PM - Volume 3 - Humanitarian Protection and Parole
4 USCIS-PM - Volume 4 - Refugees and Asylees
5 USCIS-PM - Volume 5 - Adoptions
6 USCIS-PM - Volume 6 - Immigrants
7 USCIS-PM - Volume 7 - Adjustment of Status
8 USCIS-PM - Volume 8 - Admissibility
9 USCIS-PM - Volume 9 - Waivers and Other Forms of Relief
This technical update replaces all instances of the term “foreign national” with “alien” throughout the Policy Manual as used to refer to a person who meets the definition provided in INA 101(a)(3) [“any person not a citizen or national of the United States”].
1 USCIS-PM - Volume 1 - General Policies and Procedures
2 USCIS-PM - Volume 2 - Nonimmigrants
6 USCIS-PM - Volume 6 - Immigrants
7 USCIS-PM - Volume 7 - Adjustment of Status
8 USCIS-PM - Volume 8 - Admissibility
9 USCIS-PM - Volume 9 - Waivers and Other Forms of Relief
10 USCIS-PM - Volume 10 - Employment Authorization
Version History
No historical versions available.