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 conduct research and community-based interventions addressing the psychological detriments of health disparities in the United States.
Field: health psychology · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — not met
Petitioner conceded he was not an advanced degree professional; AAO found he did not meet at least three of the six exceptional ability criteria (only satisfied the academic record criterion), and thus is not eligible for EB-2 classification.
How the evidence was treated
- degree · credited
- resume experience · discounted
“These letters do not establish at least ten years of full-time experience in the occupation being sought.”
AAO decision text - certification membership · discounted
“these records do not establish that he has a license to practice his profession or has a certification for his profession or occupation”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“the record does not include sufficient documentation to establish that this is 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 found the threshold exceptional-ability classification dispositive and explicitly declined to reach any NIW/Dhanasar prong analysis, citing INS v. Bagamasbad for not making advisory findings. New employer letter and APA membership letter postdating the filing date were excluded under the Katigbak rule requiring eligibility at time of filing.
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)
- Flores v. Garland
- Matter of Katigbak
- USCIS Policy Manual F.5(B)(2)
What this case teaches
Analyst reading of the decision text.
Petitioner failed to meet at least three of six exceptional-ability regulatory criteria (only satisfied the degree criterion), making him ineligible for underlying EB-2 classification; NIW prongs never reached.
Secure underlying EB-2 classification first: document ten years' relevant experience, valid license/certification, and pre-filing professional memberships before contesting NIW prongs.
moderate
person_focused
Cases in adjacent profiles
- The Petitioner, a senior principal biostatistician, proposes to develop innovative statistical and machine-learning meth
- The Petitioner proposed to use advanced deep learning and machine learning models to create efficient, safe, and well-pe
- The Petitioner proposes to advance machine learning methods for the design and optimization of advanced metamaterials an
- The Petitioner, a postdoctoral chemist, proposed to continue developing high-performance materials and novel synthetic m
- The Petitioner proposes to design novel sensor data processing methods and machine learning algorithms for smart wearabl