NIW Bearings
dismissedJAN162024_04B52032024-01-16 · appeal · Nebraska Service Center

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 work in digital media/video production, claiming exceptional ability rather than pursuing an endeavor tied to an advanced degree.

Field: digital media · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

EB-2 threshold — not met

Petitioner failed to meet at least three of six exceptional ability criteria; only met one criterion (8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(3)(ii)(A)), failing the professional membership and recognition/achievement criteria, and belatedly-raised licensing and salary criteria were unsupported.

How the evidence was treated

  • certification membership · discounted
    he has not provided information regarding the qualifications for membership in this organization
    AAO decision text
  • recommendation letter · discounted
    they do not provide any specific details that establish the Petitioner's recognition for achievements and significant contributions
    AAO decision text
  • awards · discounted
    without more, this evidence does not show he has received the required recognition for significant contributions
    AAO decision text
  • other · discounted
    the Petitioner does not identify the evidence he believes may be comparable to the licensing criterion
    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 withdrew the Director's favorable finding on the professional membership criterion, resulting in the Petitioner meeting only one of six exceptional ability criteria. Because the threshold EB-2 classification failed, the AAO expressly declined to reach the Dhanasar NIW analysis (all three prongs reserved), citing INS v. Bagamasbad and Matter of L-A-C-. Petitioner's belated claims to licensing and salary criteria raised for the first time on appeal were rejected as improperly raised and unsupported.

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. 103.3
  • 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(2)
  • 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(3)(iii)
  • Matter of L-A-C-
  • Poursina v. USCIS
  • USCIS Policy Manual F.5(B)(2)

Cases in adjacent profiles