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 Brazilian forest engineer, proposed to work as an environmental engineer and establish a consulting and forestry management company in the United States, addressing environmental challenges through sustainable land management and innovative forestry solutions.
Field: environmental/forest engineering and forestry management consulting · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — not met
Petitioner met only 2 of 6 criteria (A and C: degree and license). AAO withdrew SCOPS findings on criteria B (10 years experience) and E (professional association membership), and agreed with SCOPS that D (exceptional salary) and F (recognition for achievements) were not met. Final merits review also conducted and failed: education and licensing deemed ordinary occupational requirements; letters lacked detail; salary evidence insufficient; no corroboration of claimed industry influence.
How the evidence was treated
- degree · credited
- certification membership · credited
- resume experience · discounted
“the letter does not provide detail explaining the Petitioner's duties”
AAO decision text - certification membership · discounted
“the record does not contain documents describing the requirements for membership in COPE”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“did not explain how this salary is representative of his exceptional ability as a forestry engineer”
AAO decision text
All 8 evidence items
- recommendation letter · discounted
“the letters do not describe the Petitioner being recognized for achievements or significant contributions in the industry or field”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“The Petitioner did not explain the significance of the articles or their content on the field or industry.”
AAO decision text - awards · discounted
“this commendation does not demonstrate his contributions to the industry or field”
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 withdrew SCOPS' favorable findings on two criteria (B and E) while affirming the denial, leaving the Petitioner worse off on the criteria count than SCOPS had found. The AAO nonetheless conducted a final merits review as a matter of procedural fairness since it was reversing a step-one finding. One of the submitted 'recognition' documents was a religious/evangelistic commendation (April 2025) that the Petitioner argued constituted formal government recognition; the AAO rejected this. The Petitioner's claimed pre-degree work experience (2015 as forestry engineer, two years before his 2017 degree and license) was flagged as internally inconsistent. NIW prongs were expressly reserved and not analyzed because the threshold EB-2 classification was not established.
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