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 IT professional, sought a national interest waiver of the job offer requirement in connection with his EB-2 petition, though the decision does not detail the specific proposed endeavor.
Field: information technology management · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — not met
AAO withdrew the Director's finding that the Petitioner qualifies as an advanced degree professional, finding the evaluator mischaracterized certificate programs as master's degrees, misstated program lengths, and did not address an unresolved discrepancy in the Petitioner's bachelor's degree transcript showing incomplete credits.
How the evidence was treated
- degree · discounted
“the submitted documents clearly state that these two extension programs resulted only in a "certificate,"”
AAO decision text - resume experience · discounted
“The job duties listed in the "professional expeiience" section of the evaluation are taken directly from the Petitioner's resume.”
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 remand turned entirely on threshold EB-2 eligibility (degree/education discrepancies), not on the Dhanasar prongs; the AAO's endorsement of the Director's prong findings was a single conclusory sentence without independent analysis. The AAO flagged a discrepancy between the Petitioner's transcript (181 of 197 required credits) and his diploma, plus perjury concerns regarding the ETA-9089 form's characterization of certificates as 'graduate degrees.'
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. 204.5(k)(2)
- 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(3)(ii)
- INA 203(b)(2)
- Matter of Ho
- Poursina v. USCIS
What this case teaches
Analyst reading of the decision text.
Director's finding that Petitioner held an advanced degree was flawed: evaluator mischaracterized certificates as master's degrees and unresolved transcript inconsistencies undermined bachelor's degree completion, requiring threshold reassessment before any Dhanasar analysis.
Ensure foreign credential evaluations accurately reflect degree type/length and resolve any transcript discrepancies with independent evidence before pursuing NIW merits arguments.
vague
person_focused
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