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, an aircraft maintenance technician, sought to continue working in that occupation in the United States, seeking exceptional-ability EB-2 classification and a waiver of the job-offer/labor-certification requirement.
Field: aircraft maintenance / aviation mechanics · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — not met
Petitioner claimed exceptional ability but met only two of six regulatory criteria (needed three): membership in professional associations failed because the qualifying membership post-dated filing and the licensing agencies were not shown to require bachelor's degrees; 10-years'-experience criterion failed because prior roles (transportation manager, operation technician) were not shown to be in the intended aircraft-mechanic occupation; recognition-for-achievements criterion failed because letters offered only general praise or unquantified anecdotes without showing industry-wide significance.
How the evidence was treated
- certification membership · discounted
“he did not demonstrate his membership at the time of the petition's filing”
AAO decision text - resume experience · discounted
“the letters did not show that he worked at least 10 years in the intended occupation of aircraft mechanic”
AAO decision text - recommendation letter · discounted
“the letters do not constitute recognition for achievements or significant contributions to the aviation industry”
AAO decision text - motion resubmission · discounted
“they do not explain how these achievements and contributions significantly affected the aviation industry”
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 resolved the case entirely on threshold EB-2 'exceptional ability' eligibility (finding fewer than the required three of six evidentiary criteria met) and expressly declined to reach the national interest waiver prongs, reserving those arguments as unnecessary to the outcome, citing INS v. Bagamasbad and Matter of L-A-C-.
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. 103.5(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)(2)
- 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(3)(ii)
- Matter of Coelho
- Matter of L-A-C-
- USCIS Policy Manual F.5(B)(2)
Cases in adjacent profiles
- The Petitioner, a mechanical engineer, proposed to advance thermal management solutions for high-power, compact, and rel
- The Petitioner, a senior engineering program manager specializing in electromechanical systems, proposed to advance moto
- The Petitioner proposed to provide innovative solutions to optimize freight and vessel operations in the U.S. shipping i
- The Petitioner, a sales manager, proposed an endeavor in the United States for which he sought an EB-2 national interest
- The Petitioner proposed to lead a nationwide initiative to develop and implement a standardized materials management mod