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 Brazilian tax auditor with customs-inspection experience, proposed to work as CEO of a foreign trade consulting firm he planned to establish in the United States.
Field: foreign trade consulting / tax auditing · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — not met
Petitioner claimed classification as an individual of exceptional ability but failed to establish at least three of six regulatory criteria; salary, membership, and recognition-for-achievement criteria were found unmet, and license criterion was waived as unaddressed.
How the evidence was treated
- certification membership · discounted
“the record does not show that membership in these organizations requires a United States bachelor's degree or its foreign equivalent”
AAO decision text - recommendation letter · discounted
“they do not identify, and thus demonstrate, that the Petitioner has been recognized for significant contributions to the industry or field”
AAO decision text - resume experience · discounted
“this does not establish his achievements and significant contributions to the industry or field of foreign trade consulting”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“this salary is not based on his indicated area of exceptional ability, foreign trade consultant; rather, it is based on his work as a tax auditor”
AAO decision text - media · discounted
“does not show that the Petitioner was recognized by peers, governmental entities, or professional or business organizations for achievements and significant contributions”
AAO decision text
All 6 evidence items
- motion resubmission · discounted
“a petitioner must meet the eligibility criteria as of the date the petition was filed”
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 resolved the appeal entirely on the threshold exceptional-ability classification, finding the Petitioner failed to meet at least three of six regulatory criteria (salary, membership, and recognition), and expressly declined to reach the Dhanasar national-interest-waiver prongs because the underlying EB-2 eligibility failure was dispositive.
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
- Flores v. Garland
- Matter of L-A-C-
- Matter of O-R-E-
- Matter of R-A-M-
- USCIS Policy Manual F.5(B)(2)
Cases in adjacent profiles
- The Petitioner proposed to work as an IT consultant in the United States, providing cybersecurity and digital transforma
- The petitioner proposed to establish his own company providing specialized business consultancy, auditing, and training
- The petitioner proposed to work as a consultant engineer through his own company, specializing in development projects t
- The Petitioner proposed to start a project management consultancy in the United States that would help small and mid-siz
- The Petitioner proposed to establish a legal consultancy in the United States focused on alternative dispute resolution