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 nurse technician, proposed to establish a home healthcare business in the U.S., serving as its chief executive officer and nurse specialist.
Field: nursing (home healthcare) · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — not met
AAO found the Petitioner did not meet at least three of the six exceptional-ability criteria under 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(3)(ii): she met only the academic-record criterion (A), while criteria B (ten years full-time experience), C (license/certification), and E (professional membership) were not satisfied; D and F were deemed waived as unaddressed on appeal.
How the evidence was treated
- degree · credited
- resume experience · discounted
“The letters do not indicate whether the Petitioner worked in a full-time capacity as required by the plain language of the criterion.”
AAO decision text - certification membership · discounted
“The record does not include evidence explaining the significance of either document, nor does it indicate that either serves as a Iicense or certification for the profession.”
AAO decision text - certification membership · discounted
“The record does not show that the Regional Council of Nursing for the Federal District of Brazil...otherwise constitutes a professional association.”
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 reversed the Director's findings on several individual exceptional-ability criteria (crediting A, but withdrawing B and C which the Director had found met), yet still reached the same ultimate conclusion that fewer than three criteria were satisfied. AAO expressly declined to reach the Dhanasar three-prong NIW analysis because threshold EB-2 exceptional-ability eligibility was not established, citing Bagamasbad and Matter of L-A-C- for declining to reach unnecessary issues.
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
- 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)
- Kazarian v. USCIS
- Matter of L-A-C-
- Matter of O-R-E-
- Matter of R-A-M-
- Poursina v. USCIS
What this case teaches
Analyst reading of the decision text.
Petitioner failed to establish at least three of six exceptional-ability criteria (full-time experience, license/certification, professional membership were unmet), making her ineligible for underlying EB-2 classification, so Dhanasar prongs were never reached.
Before addressing NIW merits, ensure underlying EB-2 classification evidence (full-time employment proof, valid license/certification, qualifying professional membership) unambiguously satisfies regulatory criteria.
moderate
public_health · economic_job_creation
person_focused
Cases in adjacent profiles
- The Petitioner, a pharmacist, proposed to work in the United States through her own company providing pharmaceutical reg
- The Petitioner, a Brazilian-trained physiotherapist, proposed to work as a physical therapist and entrepreneur in the Un
- The Petitioner, a resident physician in New York holding a Chinese bachelor of medicine (MBBS) degree found equivalent t
- The Petitioner, a music therapist, proposed to establish and expand music therapy services and community music programs
- The Petitioner, a physical therapist, proposed to work as a physical therapist in the United States while operating his