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 business consultant and entrepreneur in digital marketing who owns a company in Brazil, sought EB-2 classification as an individual of exceptional ability with a national interest waiver.
Field: digital marketing / business consulting · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — not met
AAO found the Petitioner failed to establish at least three of the six exceptional-ability criteria: his high school diploma did not relate to his field, he submitted no employer letters showing ten years of experience, his Brazilian business/labor documents were not a license or certification, his claimed salary evidence was unsubstantiated and non-comparable, and his memberships were not shown to be in qualifying professional associations.
How the evidence was treated
- degree · discounted
“Petitioner does not show how his high school diploma... relates to his area of exceptional ability”
AAO decision text - resume experience · discounted
“the Petitioner has not submitted any letters from employers showing he has at least ten years of experience”
AAO decision text - certification membership · discounted
“Petitioner has not, however, established that either of these documents is a license or certification for a particular profession or occupation”
AAO decision text - certification membership · discounted
“the record does not include evidence such as the membership requirements, to demonstrate that Associatec or APP are professional associations”
AAO decision text - contract revenue · discounted
“the accountant's declaration is not substantiated with independent and objective evidence, such as invoices, payroll records, bank statements”
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 disagreed with SCOPS' unexplained finding that Petitioner met three of six exceptional-ability criteria, instead concluding he met none, and consequently declined to reach the final merits determination or the Dhanasar NIW analysis, reserving those issues under Bagamasbad and Matter of L-A-C-.
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.
- Flores v. Garland
- Matter of L-A-C-
Cases in adjacent profiles
- The Petitioner proposed to work as an IT consultant in the United States, providing cybersecurity and digital transforma
- The petitioner proposed to establish his own company providing specialized business consultancy, auditing, and training
- The petitioner proposed to work as a consultant engineer through his own company, specializing in development projects t
- The Petitioner proposed to start a project management consultancy in the United States that would help small and mid-siz
- The Petitioner proposed to establish a legal consultancy in the United States focused on alternative dispute resolution