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 Brazilian national, proposed to open a sport nutrition retail enterprise in the United States.
Field: sport nutrition retail / business · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — not met
Petitioner failed to establish an advanced degree or its foreign equivalent (graduate certificates/specialization courses did not equate to a U.S. master's degree), and failed to establish five years of progressive experience after her bachelor's-equivalent qualification date, as required letters were either from non-employers or lacked sufficient detail. Exceptional ability claim was deemed waived as unaddressed on appeal.
How the evidence was treated
- degree · discounted
“a Latu Sensu certificate is not the equivalent of a U.S. Master's degree unless later accepted by a graduate studies program”
AAO decision text - resume experience · discounted
“only work experience after the date of qualification may be considered relevant to this requirement”
AAO decision text - recommendation letter · discounted
“these letters are not from current or past employers, they do not meet the regulatory requirements”
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
The AAO partially withdrew the Director's decision, finding the Petitioner's undergraduate degree equivalent to a U.S. bachelor's degree based on a Morningside Evaluations report, but still dismissed the appeal because progressive experience and advanced-degree equivalency were not established. The exceptional-ability claim was deemed waived because the Petitioner did not contest the Director's findings on appeal. The AAO expressly declined to reach the Dhanasar NIW prongs, citing INS v. Bagamasbad and Matter of L-A-C-, since the threshold EB-2 failure was dispositive.
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
- 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(2)
- 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(3)(iii)
- Flores v. Garland
- Matter of L-A-C-
- Matter of O-R-E-
- Matter of R-A-M-
- USCIS Policy Manual F.5(B)(2)
What this case teaches
Analyst reading of the decision text.
Petitioner failed to establish underlying EB-2 eligibility: foreign credentials not proven equivalent to a U.S. master's degree, and employer letters lacked detail to show five years progressive experience; NIW/Dhanasar analysis reserved.
Secure credential equivalency evaluations and detailed, duty-specific employer letters to establish EB-2 classification before litigating national interest waiver merits.
vague
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 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