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 owns and operates a restaurant in California and sought classification as an individual of exceptional ability in business, with a national interest waiver of the job offer requirement.
Field: restaurant business · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — not met
The Petitioner failed to meet at least three of the six regulatory criteria for exceptional ability (10 years' experience, license/certification, salary demonstrating exceptional ability, membership, recognition), and comparable evidence was also found insufficient.
How the evidence was treated
- degree · credited
- resume experience · discounted
“she has been a business owner for less than ten years”
AAO decision text - certification membership · discounted
“Recognition received after the petition's filing date does not demonstrate the Petitioner's eligibility at the time of filing.”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“she has not shown that this compensation demonstrated exceptional ability”
AAO decision text - contract revenue · discounted
“the Petitioner has not shown that the successful operation of her business and ability to generate a profit set her apart from other small business owners”
AAO decision text
All 6 evidence items
- other · discounted
“USCIS' approval of the Petitioner's nonimmigrant petition is not evidence of recognition for achievements and significant contributions”
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
This is a revocation case: USCIS initially approved the petition then issued NOIRs and revoked approval. Because the Petitioner failed to establish the underlying exceptional-ability classification, the AAO found the national interest waiver issue moot and never reached prong analysis. The decision focuses heavily on post-filing evidence (2015 W-2, 2016 chamber membership/certificate, 2013-2015 tax returns) being categorically excluded under Matter of Katigbak's time-of-filing rule, and on rejecting E-2 nonimmigrant approvals as evidence of 'recognition for achievements' for the immigrant classification.
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)(3)(ii)
- 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(3)(iii)
- Matter of Ho
- Matter of Katigbak
- Matter of Otiende
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