NIW Bearings
dismissedAPR252024_09B52032024-04-25 · 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 proposed to establish and manage a special education business providing services—through professionals in health, education, speech therapy, physiotherapy, psychology, and occupational therapy—to children with learning disabilities.

Field: special education services for children · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

EB-2 threshold — not met

Petitioner did not establish five years of progressive post-baccalaureate experience in the specialty of special education; her business ownership experience (building maintenance, food supplements/retail) and marketing employment were unrelated to the specialty or predated her degree.

How the evidence was treated

  • resume experience · discounted
    they do not show her job duties relate to her indicated specialty
    AAO decision text
  • certification membership · discounted
    the certificates indicate the Petitioner as an owner and administrator for the businesses, but do not indicate her management
    AAO decision text
  • recommendation letter · discounted
    they do not show her management of the business
    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 agreed with Director that threshold EB-2 advanced degree eligibility failed on the experience prong, making it unnecessary to reach the national interest waiver prongs (Dhanasar) at all; Director had found substantial merit met but national importance and prong 3 not met, but AAO did not need to reach that analysis.

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. 204.5(k)(2)
  • Flores v. Garland
  • Matter of L-A-C-

Cases in adjacent profiles