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 proposed to open his own U.S.-based business providing performance-arts consultation services, choreography assistance, and private/group acting or dance classes.
Field: performing arts / dance / choreography · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — not met
Petitioner did not establish his foreign degree was equivalent to a U.S. bachelor's degree or, alternatively, that he had five years of progressive post-baccalaureate experience in the specialty; in the alternative, the record satisfied fewer than three of the six exceptional-ability criteria (failing degree/award, ten-years experience, and recognition criteria). Because the threshold classification failed, the AAO reserved its opinion on the Dhanasar national-interest-waiver prongs.
How the evidence was treated
- business plan · discounted
“the Petitioner did not elaborate on what the proposed endeavor would entail”
AAO decision text - degree · discounted
“the record does not establish whether the foreign degree is equivalent to a U.S. bachelor's degree”
AAO decision text - resume experience · discounted
“the letters also do not specify whether the Petitioner worked on a full-time basis for any of the employers”
AAO decision text - recommendation letter · discounted
“the letter does not specify the starting and ending date of the Petitioner's experience”
AAO decision text - certification membership · discounted
“the letters do not provide detailed information regarding the Petitioner's specific achievements or significant contributions”
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 appeal failed entirely at the threshold EB-2 classification stage (both advanced-degree and exceptional-ability alternatives), so the AAO expressly declined to reach any Dhanasar national-interest-waiver analysis, citing INS v. Bagamasbad and Matter of L-A-C- to justify not addressing unnecessary issues. The Petitioner never clarified whether his claimed exceptional ability was in business, performance, choreography, or teaching, which undermined nearly every evidentiary submission.
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. 103.3
- 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)
- Matter of Katigbak
- Matter of L-A-C-
- USCIS Policy Manual F.5(B)(2)
What this case teaches
Analyst reading of the decision text.
Petitioner failed to establish threshold EB-2 eligibility: no qualifying advanced degree or equivalent, no 5 years post-baccalaureate experience, and fewer than three exceptional-ability criteria met with deficient, undated, unverifiable employer letters.
Before arguing national interest, ensure basic EB-2 eligibility is airtight: dated, regulation-compliant employer letters, clear degree equivalency, and a single coherent occupational specialty.
vague
person_focused
Cases in adjacent profiles
- The Petitioner, a musician and music educator, proposed to advance music education in the United States by opening a pia
- The petitioner, a tattoo artist, sought EB-2 classification as an individual of exceptional ability along with a nationa
- The Petitioner, an MMA athlete and trainer, proposed to operate a jiu jitsu company through which he would train and com
- The Petitioner sought to establish an arts education academy in Ohio, with plans to expand to New York and Michigan, off
- The Petitioner, an art curator, proposed to establish a nonprofit cultural center/platform focused on exhibitions, oral