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 proposed to establish and lead as CEO a cybersecurity and crisis management company in Florida, offering risk assessment, security plan development, team training, and implementation of preventive measures.
Field: cybersecurity and crisis management · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — not met
AAO found Petitioner met only one of six exceptional ability criteria (official academic record). It withdrew SCOPS findings on criteria B (10 years experience), C (license/certification), D (salary), and E (professional associations), and reserved judgment on criterion F. Petitioner failed to meet the required minimum of three criteria.
How the evidence was treated
- degree · credited
- resume experience · discounted
“the duties do not establish duties of a CEO that oversees corporate decisions, manages overall operations, and allocates resources efficiently.”
AAO decision text - certification membership · discounted
“the Petitioner does not explain how these certificates amount to certification for a particular profession or occupation.”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“the Petitioner has not presented sufficient documentation showing that her earnings are indicative of exceptional ability relative to others working in her field.”
AAO decision text - certification membership · discounted
“the Petitioner has not asserted, and the record does not otherwise demonstrate, that ACM, ISACA, Intituto Joule, and Microsoft Alumni Network requires their members to possess the equivalent of a U.S. bachelor's degree.”
AAO decision text
All 6 evidence items
- business plan · 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
AAO reversed SCOPS on four of six exceptional ability criteria, finding SCOPS had incorrectly credited criteria B, C, D, and E. The salary criterion analysis is notable for its detailed rejection of a third-party Salary Sync report whose underlying source links (Glassdoor, Jooble, Vagas, Geekhunter) were either broken, outdated, or mismatched to the Petitioner's occupation. The NIW prong analysis was entirely bypassed as the threshold EB-2 eligibility failure was dispositive.
What this case teaches
Analyst reading of the decision text.
Petitioner failed to meet at least three of six exceptional-ability criteria: employment letters described unrelated IT support duties (not CEO functions), certificates weren't professional certifications, salary comparison data (Salary Sync/Glassdoor/Jooble) was unverifiable or mismatched, and cited associations lacked degree-equivalent membership requirements—leaving only the academic-record criterion satisfied, precluding reaching NIW analysis.
Before arguing national interest, ensure underlying EB-2 classification evidence (employment letters, certifications, salary comparators) precisely and verifiably matches the claimed occupation and exceptional-ability criteria.
moderate
person_focused
Cases in adjacent profiles
- The Beneficiary proposed to establish an asset investment management and compliance advisory firm in New York offering c
- The Petitioner proposed to develop and commercialize zeolite-based products in the United States, including agricultural
- The Petitioner proposed to operate a medical billing and healthcare revenue cycle management firm in the United States,
- The Petitioner proposed to establish and operate an IT consultancy company in Michigan providing cloud migration, cybers
- The Petitioner proposed to found and operate a civil engineering consulting services company in Massachusetts, offering