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 decision does not describe the specific proposed endeavor in detail; the analysis instead focuses on whether the Petitioner qualifies as an advanced degree professional and on the reliability of a foreign credential evaluation.
Field: business/finance management · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — not met
The AAO withdrew the Director's conclusion that the Petitioner is an advanced degree professional, finding the foreign credential evaluation unreliable: it failed to reconcile its conclusions with AACRAO EDGE, did not establish the length of the underlying bachelor's degree program, and relied on unverified employment history rather than employer letters as required by 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(3)(i)(B).
Prong 2 — well positionedestablished
“we must also withdraw the Director's conclusion that the Petitioner is well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor.”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- degree · discounted
“Without additional evidence, the Petitioner also has not established that he holds the foreign equivalent of a U.S. bachelor's degree.”
AAO decision text - resume experience · discounted
“he does not claim to have reviewed any employment letters to establish the Petitioner's work history or experience”
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
Unusual procedural posture: rather than resolving the Dhanasar prongs, the AAO remands primarily because the foreign credential evaluation (equating two Brazilian post-graduation certificates to two U.S. MBAs) was found unreliable, citing discrepancies with the AACRAO EDGE database and the evaluator's failure to review employment letters or address program length. The Director's finding that prong 2 was met is vacated as a downstream consequence of the flawed evaluation, not on independent Dhanasar grounds.
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.
The petitioner's claimed MBA-equivalent credential was unsupported/inconsistent with AACRAO EDGE standards and lacked required employment letters, undermining both EB-2 threshold eligibility and the tainted 'well positioned' (prong 2) finding, requiring remand.
Ensure foreign credential evaluations reconcile with recognized equivalency databases (e.g., AACRAO EDGE) and are supported by proper employment verification letters before relying on them for EB-2 threshold eligibility.
vague
mixed
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