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 bakery and pastry chef, sought to continue working in her field in the United States, claiming eligibility as an individual of exceptional ability with a waiver of the job offer requirement.
Field: baking and pastry arts · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — not met
AAO previously found Petitioner met only 2 of 6 exceptional-ability criteria (degree and 10 years' experience) and failed the remaining criteria: certificates/ACDSA membership did not constitute a required license or professional membership, salary evidence reflected administrative work rather than the claimed field, recommendation letters lacked authors' credentials and did not address achievements/contributions, and comparable-evidence criterion was not adequately explained. On motion, Petitioner did not address these findings or submit new facts, so the motions were dismissed.
How the evidence was treated
- certification membership · discounted
“her profession or occupation requires the certificates she attained or that membership in the... ACDSA... constitutes a license”
AAO decision text - recommendation letter · discounted
“letters of recommendation are sufficient to demonstrate recognition for achievement and significant contributions to the industry”
AAO decision text - resume experience · discounted
“evidence of earnings were for work as an administrator rather than the claimed area of exceptional ability”
AAO decision text - motion resubmission · discounted
“the evidence submitted on motion was previously submitted in these proceedings, they do not constitute "new facts"”
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 reserved the national interest waiver (Dhanasar prong) analysis entirely because the underlying exceptional-ability classification was not established; the decision concerns a combined motion to reopen/reconsider dismissed solely for failing to submit new facts or identify legal/factual error, not for any prong-specific NIW deficiency.
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)(ii)
- 8 C.F.R. 103.5(a)(2)
- 8 C.F.R. 103.5(a)(3)
- 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(3)(ii)
- 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(3)(iii)
- Matter of Coelho
Cases in adjacent profiles
- The Petitioner, an aircraft mechanic and instructor, proposed to enhance aviation maintenance training programs, support
- The Petitioner seeks EB-2 classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree with a national inter
- The petitioner sought an EB-2 national interest waiver of the job offer requirement, but the substance of the proposed e
- The Beneficiary, sponsored by a private airline, sought EB-2 classification as an individual of exceptional ability in a
- The petitioner sought an EB-2 national interest waiver as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree; the sp