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 TV systems/electronic engineering technician, sought EB-2 classification as an individual of exceptional ability with a national interest waiver, though his proposed endeavor was not substantively discussed because the appeal was resolved on threshold grounds.
Field: electronic engineering / TV systems technician · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — not met
The Petitioner failed to establish at least three of the six regulatory criteria for exceptional ability under 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(3)(ii): the employment experience letter did not show ten years of full-time experience, the salary evidence did not show a salary commensurate with exceptional ability, the union membership was not shown to be a 'professional association,' and the recommendation letters did not show significant recognized contributions to the field.
How the evidence was treated
- resume experience · discounted
“the letter does not indicate that the Petitioner has at least ten years of full-time experience”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“the Petitioner did not demonstrate that he commanded a salary commensurate with exceptional ability”
AAO decision text - certification membership · discounted
“the Petitioner did not show how a union-affiliated association qualifies as a professional association”
AAO decision text - recommendation letter · discounted
“the letters do not sufficiently demonstrate his recognition for achievements and significant 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 dismissed the appeal solely on the threshold exceptional-ability determination, expressly declining to reach the Dhanasar national interest waiver analysis (substantial merit/national importance, well-positioned, or balancing prongs), citing Bagamasbad and Matter of L-A-C- for the proposition that agencies need not decide unnecessary issues.
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(g)(1)
- 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(2)
- 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(3)(ii)
- Matter of L-A-C-
- Poursina v. USCIS
- USCIS Policy Manual F.5(B)(2)
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