NIW Bearings
dismissedDEC032025_04B52032025-12-03 · combined

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 decision does not describe the underlying proposed endeavor; it addresses only the threshold advanced-degree issue and the procedural sufficiency of the Petitioner's motion, with the national interest waiver prongs left as previously decided (prong one failed, prongs two and three reserved).

Field: economics · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

EB-2 threshold — not met

The Petitioner's transcript showed she completed her Russian bachelor's degree program in less than four years, and the submitted academic evaluation failed to address this discrepancy, the shortened program notation, or the significance of the listed subject/hour totals, so the Petitioner did not establish a foreign equivalent U.S. baccalaureate degree required for advanced-degree classification.

How the evidence was treated

  • degree · discounted
    the academic evaluation does not provide probative evidence demonstrating that she possesses a foreign equivalent baccalaureate degree
    AAO decision text
  • motion resubmission · discounted
    The motion contains only a brief without any new claims and corroborated with documentation.
    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 decision principally resolves a threshold foreign-degree-equivalency dispute (whether a Russian bachelor's completed in under four years qualifies as a U.S. baccalaureate equivalent) rather than re-litigating the NIW prongs, which remain governed by the prior appellate decision finding prong one unmet and reserving prongs two and three. The motion to reopen was dismissed for lack of new facts/evidence, and the motion to reconsider was dismissed because the Petitioner merely reargued issues already addressed on appeal without identifying legal or policy error, citing Matter of O-S-G-.

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. 103.5(a)(1)(i)
  • 8 C.F.R. 103.5(a)(1)(ii)
  • 8 C.F.R. 103.5(a)(2)
  • 8 C.F.R. 103.5(a)(3)
  • 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(2)
  • Matter of Coelho
  • Matter of O-S-G-

Cases in adjacent profiles