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 co-founded a company developing AI-powered robotics and control systems, specifically teachable household robots for practical home assistance, and sought EB-2 classification based on exceptional ability in that field.
Field: artificial intelligence powered robotics and control systems · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — not met
Petitioner claimed only two of six criteria (A and F) directly, plus comparable evidence for B, C, and E. AAO withdrew SCOPS finding that criterion A (degree) was met, concluding aerospace engineering degree was not shown to relate to robotics and control systems by shared skillsets, knowledge, or expertise. Comparable evidence for B and C (Y Combinator participation and $1.7M venture capital funding) rejected as insufficient substitutes. Criterion E claim abandoned on appeal. Petitioner thus failed to meet the required three of six criteria; no final merits determination conducted.
How the evidence was treated
- degree · discounted
“it is not preponderantly evident from the evidence in the record how the list of coursework provided by the Petitioner relates to robotics and control systems by shared skillsets, knowledge, and expertise.”
AAO decision text - certification membership · discounted
“Y Combinator accepts companies into its program, not individuals like the Petitioner... Y Combinator is not limited to the field of robotics and control systems.”
AAO decision text - funding · discounted
“venture capital funding was provided as an investment or business transaction... the record does not persuasively establish that an investment or business transaction involving venture capital denotes specific knowledge, skill, or competence.”
AAO decision text - recommendation letter · discounted
“the record does not sufficiently establish that the selective nature of admittance for participation in Y Combinator renders selection and participation equivalent to... exceptional ability after 10 years of full-time employment experience.”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“Archived content is generally out of date but could contain some useful content... the Petitioner's participation... does not compare favorably to the criteria it attempts to supplant.”
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 took the unusual step of withdrawing SCOPS's favorable finding on criterion A (degree), concluding the aerospace engineering degree was not shown to relate to robotics and control systems — effectively making the threshold failure worse than SCOPS found. The AAO also found the criterion E claim abandoned on appeal because the Petitioner failed to respond to the RFE on that point, though it noted in a footnote that even if not abandoned, Y Combinator membership (limited to corporate entities, not individuals) and venture capital fundraising would still not satisfy the professional-association criterion. NIW prongs were expressly reserved and not analyzed. The decision cites a 2011 archived USCIS FAQ on entrepreneurs and EB-2, noting it is 'almost 14-and-a-half-year-old' archived content.
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