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 operate and grow a business installing refrigeration/HVAC systems (e.g., walk-in freezers), which he claimed promotes energy efficiency and sustainable practices.
Field: HVAC / refrigeration installation and energy efficiency · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — not met
AAO's prior appellate decision found Petitioner did not establish eligibility for EB-2 classification as an advanced degree professional or exceptional ability individual; this remained dispositive and unaddressed by the current motions.
How the evidence was treated
- contract revenue · discounted
“the Petitioner has not provided new facts to establish his eligibility for EB-2 classification”
AAO decision text - recommendation letter · discounted
“the Petitioner has not provided new facts to establish his eligibility for EB-2 classification”
AAO decision text - certification membership · discounted
“this membership post-dates the filing date of the petition and therefore would not be considered”
AAO decision text - motion resubmission · discounted
“The Petitioner has previously submitted this evidence, which we considered in our decision dismissing his appeal.”
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 petition was denied and remained denied purely on threshold EB-2 classification grounds (advanced degree/exceptional ability); the AAO explicitly reserved and never reached the merits of the national interest waiver across multiple decisions (appeal, motion to reconsider, and two combined motions), citing INS v. 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. 103.2(b)(1)
- 8 C.F.R. 103.5
- Matter of L-A-C-
- Matter of O-S-G-
What this case teaches
Analyst reading of the decision text.
Petitioner never established underlying EB-2 classification (advanced degree professional/exceptional ability), and motions failed to present new facts or identify legal error on that dispositive threshold issue, so NIW merits were never reached.
Secure the underlying EB-2 classification eligibility first; motions to reopen/reconsider must directly address the actual dismissal ground, not shift to unaddressed merits issues like NIW.
vague
economic_growth_generic · economic_job_creation
person_focused
Cases in adjacent profiles
- The Beneficiary proposed to establish an asset investment management and compliance advisory firm in New York offering c
- The Petitioner proposed to develop and commercialize zeolite-based products in the United States, including agricultural
- The Petitioner proposed to operate a medical billing and healthcare revenue cycle management firm in the United States,
- The Petitioner proposed to establish and lead as CEO a cybersecurity and crisis management company in Florida, offering
- The Petitioner proposed to establish and operate an IT consultancy company in Michigan providing cloud migration, cybers