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 described himself as an entrepreneur in the field of automation and control, with claimed experience in logistics, maintenance, production, automation engineering, and industrial production management. The AAO did not reach the specifics of his proposed endeavor because the appeal was dismissed on threshold EB-2 grounds.
Field: automation and control / industrial production management · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — not met
The Petitioner failed to establish he held a single foreign degree equivalent to a U.S. bachelor's degree plus five years of progressive post-baccalaureate experience. His diploma from a Brazilian institution equated only to a two- to three-year 'Title of Technologist' credential rather than a four-year bachelor's degree per EDGE. Discrepancies in dates (diploma issued 2018 vs. resume claiming 2007, a 'Certificate of Conclusion' stating he would 'graduate in due time' in 2015) and an unsubstantiated MBA claim (no degree/transcripts provided, inconsistent with prior filings) left substantial uncertainty unresolved under Matter of Ho. The Petitioner waived the exceptional-ability classification by not raising it on appeal.
How the evidence was treated
- degree · discounted
“the Petitioner has not sufficiently demonstrated that he earned the foreign equivalent of a U.S. bachelor's degree”
AAO decision text - resume experience · discounted
“the Petitioner's resume reflected that this was awarded this in December 2007, while the diploma itself indicates that it was issued in January 2018”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“The Petitioner's assertions, including those on appeal, do not indicate that he ever earned an academic or professional degree...above that of a bachelor's degree”
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 was dismissed entirely on threshold EB-2 eligibility (advanced degree professional) grounds due to inconsistent and unsubstantiated educational claims (diploma date discrepancies, an unsubstantiated MBA, and a Brazilian 'Technologist' credential falling short of a four-year bachelor's degree per EDGE). The AAO expressly declined to reach the Dhanasar national interest waiver prongs, treating the threshold failure as fully dispositive. The Petitioner also waived his exceptional-ability claim by not raising it on appeal.
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
- Matter of Ho
- Matter of L-A-C-
- Matter of O-R-E-
- Matter of R-A-M-
- Poursina v. USCIS
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