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 sought to continue her career as a project manager and business strategist working with startups across different economic segments, helping them with technology, artificial intelligence, and cybersecurity.
Field: information technology and telecommunications / project management · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — addressed
The Director found the Petitioner qualified as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree (U.S. MBA); this was not disputed on appeal.
How the evidence was treated
- recommendation letter · ignored
- business plan · ignored
- resume experience · ignored
- other · ignored
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 remanded not because of a substantive prong failure but because the Acting Director issued two contradictory RFEs (one erroneously stating the advanced-degree requirement was unmet, the other reversing that finding), made contradictory statements about whether the second Dhanasar prong was satisfied, and issued a denial that merely listed Dhanasar factors without applying them to the record or explaining deficiencies, violating 8 C.F.R. 103.3(a)(1)(i). A footnote notes the Petitioner filed and was approved on a subsequent NIW petition after this appeal was filed.
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. 204.5(k)(2)
- Poursina v. USCIS
What this case teaches
Analyst reading of the decision text.
Acting Director issued contradictory RFEs and a denial listing Dhanasar factors without applying them to the evidence, violating the requirement to explain specific reasons for denial under 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(1)(i).
Procedural adjudicator errors (contradictory RFEs, unexplained denials) can secure remand independent of the underlying merits strength of the NIW case.
vague
critical_emerging_tech · economic_growth_generic
mixed
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