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, a marketing manager with business education and employment in Brazil, sought an EB-2 national interest waiver, but the decision does not describe the specifics of his proposed endeavor because the AAO remanded on threshold degree and credibility issues before reaching the Dhanasar prongs.
Field: marketing management · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — not met
AAO found the Petitioner did not establish either an advanced degree or five years of qualifying post-baccalaureate progressive experience; the credential evaluation relied on uncorroborated pre-baccalaureate employment and unsupported claims, and a required employer letter was missing.
How the evidence was treated
- degree · discounted
“The credential evaluation relies on uncorroborated claims of employment in 2012 and early 2013”
AAO decision text - resume experience · discounted
“The Petitioner has not submitted a letter from that claimed employer to confirm and describe this claimed employment”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“The employment proposed in the 0-1 petition and the Petitioner's statements from January 2018 conflict with key claims in the present petition”
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 AAO never reached the NIW prongs; it remanded solely due to unresolved threshold advanced-degree eligibility and newly discovered derogatory information (a prior O-1 petition and consular application containing conflicting employment/education claims), directing the Director to address possible material misrepresentation under INA 212(a)(6)(C)(i). A footnote notes that a second I-140 filed by the Petitioner was approved while this appeal was pending, but that record was not before the AAO.
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)
- INA 203(b)(2)
- Matter of Ho
What this case teaches
Analyst reading of the decision text.
AAO found the petitioner had not established advanced-degree/five-years-experience eligibility and identified unresolved, material inconsistencies between the petition, a prior O-1 filing, and consular statements about education/employment history.
Ensure consistent, corroborated employment and education records across all immigration filings; unresolved inconsistencies can derail even a merits-ready NIW case before national importance is assessed.
vague
person_focused
Cases in adjacent profiles
- The Petitioner, a mechanical engineer, proposed to advance thermal management solutions for high-power, compact, and rel
- The Petitioner, a senior engineering program manager specializing in electromechanical systems, proposed to advance moto
- The Petitioner proposed to provide innovative solutions to optimize freight and vessel operations in the U.S. shipping i
- The Petitioner, a sales manager, proposed an endeavor in the United States for which he sought an EB-2 national interest
- The Petitioner proposed to lead a nationwide initiative to develop and implement a standardized materials management mod