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 blockchain engineer, sought to continue work in blockchain technology and software development, including development of a cryptocurrency coin he created.
Field: blockchain engineering / software development · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — not met
Petitioner claimed exceptional ability but failed to establish at least three of six regulatory criteria; AAO agreed with Director that only the academic-record criterion was met, and found the membership and recognition-for-achievements criteria not satisfied, and the license/certification criterion waived on appeal as unchallenged.
How the evidence was treated
- degree · credited
- certification membership · discounted
“record does not show that it required members to hold a U.S. or foreign equivalent baccalaureate degree”
AAO decision text - recommendation letter · discounted
“letters generally praise the Petitioner's skills, knowledge, and past successes, they do not specifically demonstrate”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“they do not show his work has been significant to the industry or field”
AAO decision text
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
AAO expressly declined to reach or discuss any of the three Dhanasar NIW prongs because the Petitioner failed to first establish eligibility for the underlying EB-2 exceptional-ability classification, citing INS v. Bagamasbad's rule against advisory findings; the case therefore turns entirely on threshold classification criteria (membership and recognition-for-achievements) rather than NIW-specific reasoning.
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
- Flores v. Garland
- INA 203(b)(2)
Cases in adjacent profiles
- The Petitioner, a mechanical engineer, proposed to advance thermal management solutions for high-power, compact, and rel
- The Petitioner, a senior engineering program manager specializing in electromechanical systems, proposed to advance moto
- The Petitioner proposed to provide innovative solutions to optimize freight and vessel operations in the U.S. shipping i
- The Petitioner, a sales manager, proposed an endeavor in the United States for which he sought an EB-2 national interest
- The Petitioner proposed to lead a nationwide initiative to develop and implement a standardized materials management mod