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, an architect, sought to work in the United States under an EB-2 classification with a national interest waiver, though the specific endeavor was not detailed in this decision.
Field: architecture · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
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
Appeal summarily dismissed because the Petitioner's brief statement merely asserted the three Dhanasar prongs were met without identifying any error of law or fact in the Director's decision, and no follow-up brief was ever filed despite the Petitioner's stated intent to submit one within 30 days. The AAO also noted a separately filed combined motion to reopen/reconsider was outside the scope of this appeal's review because it postdated the appeal filing.
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