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 decision does not describe the Petitioner's proposed endeavor; it addresses only the procedural validity of a third combined motion to reopen/reconsider.
How the evidence was treated
- motion resubmission · discounted
“The Petitioner does not, however, provide new facts or documentary evidence relevant to our lack of jurisdiction over her motions”
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 decision does not reach the NIW merits at all; it is a purely procedural dismissal of a third combined motion to reopen/reconsider because the Petitioner failed to address the AAO's most recent decision (a jurisdictional dismissal) rather than presenting new facts or legal error regarding jurisdiction. No prong or threshold analysis occurs.
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. 103.5(a)(1)(i)
- 8 C.F.R. 103.5(a)(2)
- 8 C.F.R. 103.5(a)(3)
- 8 C.F.R. 103.5(a)(4)
Cases in adjacent profiles
- The Petitioner, an aircraft mechanic and instructor, proposed to enhance aviation maintenance training programs, support
- The Petitioner seeks EB-2 classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree with a national inter
- The petitioner sought an EB-2 national interest waiver of the job offer requirement, but the substance of the proposed e
- The Beneficiary, sponsored by a private airline, sought EB-2 classification as an individual of exceptional ability in a
- The petitioner sought an EB-2 national interest waiver as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree; the sp