The decision does not describe the specific proposed endeavor; it notes only that the service center had already found the petitioner qualified for the EB-2 advanced-degree classification but denied the discretionary national interest waiver.

Notable

This decision never reaches the substantive NIW merits. The AAO dismisses the appeal solely on a procedural ground: it found the Form I-140 and the appellate Form G-28 bore a 'simulated' typewritten-script signature rather than an original handwritten signature, rendering the petition improperly filed under 8 C.F.R. 103.2(b)(1) and the appeal itself defective. The AAO states this signature defect is an independent and alternative basis for dismissal, expressly declining to address whether the underlying discretionary waiver denial (which the service center had based on the merits) was correct. All three Dhanasar prongs and the threshold classification issue are therefore unaddressed in this decision.

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. 103.2(b)(1)
• 8 C.F.R. 103.3
• Section 291 of the Act

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