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 attorney specializing in tax, labor, and corporate law, proposed to establish a legal consulting company in the United States addressing these topics, also claiming expertise in military science.
Field: tax, labor, and corporate law / military science · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — not met
Petitioner failed to establish eligibility as either an advanced degree professional (no evidence of five years of progressive post-baccalaureate experience via employer letters) or as an individual of exceptional ability (met three regulatory criteria but failed the final merits determination showing expertise significantly above that ordinarily encountered in the field).
How the evidence was treated
- resume experience · discounted
“he does not address the specific deficiency noted by the Director in conforming with the regulatory requirement”
AAO decision text - recommendation letter · discounted
“they largely repeated the Petitioner's claims of his own contributions to the field without further probative detail”
AAO decision text - certification membership · credited
- degree · credited
- other · discounted
“did not discuss any particular achievements or contributions by the Petitioner”
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 expressly reserved discussion of the Dhanasar national interest waiver prongs entirely, dismissing solely on failure of threshold EB-2 classification (neither advanced degree nor exceptional ability established), citing Bagamasbad and Matter of L-A-C- for declining to reach unnecessary issues. Petitioner satisfied three of six exceptional ability regulatory criteria but failed the final merits determination.
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
- Kazarian v. USCIS
- Matter of L-A-C-
- Matter of O-R-E-
- Matter of R-A-M-
- USCIS Policy Manual F.5(B)(2)
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