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 sought to operate and grow his own janitorial services business in the United States as an entrepreneur.
Field: janitorial services · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — not met
Petitioner failed to establish exceptional ability under 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(3)(ii), meeting none of the six evidentiary categories (only asserted exceptional ability, not advanced degree professional status).
How the evidence was treated
- degree · discounted
“Neither the briefs, nor the rest of the evidence in the record explains how the electro-electronic field relates to entrepreneurship in janitorial services.”
AAO decision text - resume experience · discounted
“the record does not establish that he has 10 years of experience as an entrepreneur in janitorial services.”
AAO decision text - certification membership · discounted
“the record does not establish that the IFMA is an association of professionals as defined in the regulations.”
AAO decision text - recommendation letter · discounted
“it does not point to the Petitioner's recognition for achievements or significant contributions to the industry of entrepreneurial janitorial services as a whole.”
AAO decision text - awards · discounted
“the record lacks any independent information as to the requirements associated with these awards, only descriptions from the Petitioner explaining the respective awards.”
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 found threshold exceptional-ability failure dispositive and expressly declined to reach the Dhanasar NIW prongs, citing Bagamasbad and Matter of L-A-C- for not reaching unnecessary issues; also rejected an unsupported claim that the Director applied a stricter-than-preponderance standard.
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. 103.2(b)(1)
- 8 C.F.R. 103.2(b)(12)
- 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(2)
- 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(3)(ii)
- 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(3)(iii)
- Kazarian v. USCIS
- Matter of L-A-C-
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 lead as CEO a cybersecurity and crisis management company in Florida, offering
- The Petitioner proposed to establish and operate an IT consultancy company in Michigan providing cloud migration, cybers