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 financial manager with prior work experience in Brazil, intended to open a financial management consultancy office in the U.S. focused on financial institutions and the steel industry.
Field: financial management / business administration · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — not met
Petitioner did not hold a qualifying advanced degree at filing: her bachelor's degree was not conferred until July 2021, months before filing, and an unexplained 11-year gap existed between coursework (2006-2010) and the degree's completion/award date. Her claimed 10 years of experience could not qualify because it did not follow receipt of the bachelor's degree as required by 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(2). She also waived any claim to exceptional ability by failing to contest that finding on appeal.
How the evidence was treated
- degree · discounted
“The documents do not explain the 11-year gap between the coursework and the completion and awarding of the degree.”
AAO decision text - resume experience · discounted
“the Petitioner has not shown that she accumulated at least five years of progressive post-baccalaureate employment experience before the filing date”
AAO decision text - certification membership · discounted
“the Petitioner did not submit any evidence to indicate that the "Tax Analyst" course certificate is equivalent to at least a baccalaureate degree”
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 found the Petitioner ineligible for the underlying EB-2 classification (both advanced-degree and exceptional-ability tracks, the latter waived on appeal for lack of specific argument) and, on that basis, expressly declined to reach the national interest waiver prongs entirely, citing INS v. Bagamasbad and Matter of L-A-C- for the proposition that agencies need not resolve 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. 103.2(b)(1)
- 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(2)
- Matter of L-A-C-
- Matter of R-A-M-
- 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