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 Beneficiary, sponsored by a private airline, sought EB-2 classification as an individual of exceptional ability in aviation, along with a national interest waiver of the job offer requirement.
Field: aviation · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — not met
AAO withdrew SCOPS' findings on criteria (A) academic records and (F) recognition for achievements, leaving the Beneficiary short of the required three criteria. AAO also concluded the record as a whole does not establish exceptional ability in a final merits determination. On motion, Petitioner failed to assert new facts or allege legal error regarding these threshold issues.
How the evidence was treated
- degree · discounted
“we withdrew SCOPS' determinations regarding 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(ii)(A)”
AAO decision text - awards · discounted
“we withdrew SCOPS' determinations regarding 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(ii)(F)”
AAO decision text - resume experience · credited
- certification membership · credited
- motion resubmission · discounted
“The Petitioner does not assert new facts that establish the Beneficiary's eligibility for the requested EB-2 classification.”
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 petitioner is a private airline (corporate petitioner), not the beneficiary himself. The AAO had previously withdrawn SCOPS' favorable threshold EB-2 finding on appeal; the motion failed because the Petitioner did not address those threshold deficiencies. The NIW prongs were never reached because the threshold EB-2 eligibility issue was dispositive. Notably, the AAO also conducted a sua sponte final merits determination on exceptional ability even though SCOPS had not done so.
What this case teaches
Analyst reading of the decision text.
Petitioner failed on motion to present new facts or show legal error regarding AAO's prior finding that Beneficiary did not meet 3 of 6 exceptional-ability criteria (academic record, peer recognition), making him ineligible for EB-2 classification itself; NIW arguments therefore not addressed.
Secure and document the underlying EB-2 classification (exceptional ability/advanced degree) with rigorous evidence before litigating NIW; failure at the threshold classification step moots all national-interest arguments.
vague
person_focused
Cases in adjacent profiles
- The Petitioner, an aircraft mechanic and instructor, proposed to enhance aviation maintenance training programs, support
- The Petitioner seeks EB-2 classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree with a national inter
- The petitioner sought an EB-2 national interest waiver of the job offer requirement, but the substance of the proposed e
- The petitioner sought an EB-2 national interest waiver as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree; the sp
- The Petitioner, a climate change policy analyst, sought an EB-2 national interest waiver to work in the United States in