NIW Bearings
dismissedAPR012025_05B52032025-04-01 · appeal · Texas Service Center

This is an AAO appeal decision — a case denied once and appealed. It shows how the framework is applied; it is not the filing population.

The petitioner, a Brazilian furniture manufacturer and carpenter, sought to expand his existing furniture business into the United States, serving as owner and CEO of the U.S. entity.

Field: carpentry / furniture manufacturing · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

EB-2 threshold — not met

Petitioner claimed exceptional ability but only established 2 of 6 regulatory criteria (academic record and 10 years' employer-verified experience); AAO found the additional claimed criteria (license/certification, salary, recognition) unmet.

How the evidence was treated

  • certification membership · discounted
    they similarly do not purport to be licenses or certifications that would satisfy this criterion
    AAO decision text
  • resume experience · credited
  • other · discounted
    we cannot conclude he meets the salary criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(ii)(D)
    AAO decision text
  • recommendation letter · discounted
    they are not letters from members of his industry that indicate any recognition for the Petitioner for achievements or significant contributions to the field
    AAO decision text
  • degree · credited

This record is one of thousands, each coded for the reasons it turned. A placement shows where your profile sits in that record, not what it predicts. See where your profile sits — 90 seconds

Notable

The AAO found the petitioner failed to establish the underlying EB-2 exceptional-ability classification and, because this was dispositive, expressly declined to reach the Dhanasar national-interest-waiver prongs, citing INS v. Bagamasbad and Matter of L-A-C- for the principle that agencies need not decide unnecessary issues.

Authorities this decision leans on

From the doctrinal survivor set — 187 authority tests across 47 distinct authorities cleared the differential-lift gates. Only those appear here.

  • 8 C.F.R. 103.3
  • 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(3)(ii)
  • 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(3)(iii)
  • Flores v. Garland
  • Matter of L-A-C-

Cases in adjacent profiles