NIW Bearings
remandedJUN102025_08B52032025-06-10 · appeal

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 civil/transportation engineer, sought EB-2 classification with a national interest waiver based on his engineering research and professional contributions.

Field: civil engineering (transportation) · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

How the evidence was treated

  • recommendation letter · discounted
    USCIS confirmed the letters lacked credibility and that [the Petitioner] purposely exaggerates their past employment and job duties.
    AAO decision text
  • resume experience · discounted
    [The Petitioner's] position as a journeyman level transportation engineer had marginal research responsibilities and was supervised by higher-level engineers.
    AAO decision text
  • citations publications · discounted
    [The Petitioner] had minimal published technical publications in comparison to all of the engineering professionals that wrote letters of recommendation for him.
    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 address NIW eligibility on the merits at all; it concerns SCOPS' procedural failure to properly revoke a previously-approved NIW petition on fraud/misrepresentation grounds. The AAO found the NOIR and revocation decision failed to specify the derogatory information (which recommendation letters were allegedly self-written) or provide a meaningful rebuttal opportunity, and remanded for issuance of a new NOIR and decision, expressing no opinion on the ultimate NIW eligibility determination.

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.

  • Matter of Ho

What this case teaches

Analyst reading of the decision text.

Decisive factor

SCOPS failed to provide specific, adequately-detailed NOIR and revocation notice identifying which letters/facts were fraudulent, denying petitioner a meaningful rebuttal opportunity, violating regulatory notice requirements.

Transferable lesson

Agencies must issue NOIRs with specific factual allegations and evidence; petitioners should challenge vague revocation notices lacking particularized derogatory-information disclosure and rebuttal opportunity.

Endeavor framing

vague

Evidence targeting

person_focused

Cases in adjacent profiles