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 mechatronics/electrical engineer with field service and installation experience, sought to continue work in the engineering field in the United States, though the specific proposed endeavor was not reached by the AAO.
Field: mechatronics/electrical engineering · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — not met
Petitioner did not dispute ineligibility as an advanced degree professional and instead claimed exceptional ability, but met only two of the six required regulatory criteria (needed at least three), failing on license/certification, salary, membership, and recognition criteria.
How the evidence was treated
- degree · credited
- resume experience · credited
- certification membership · discounted
“The Petitioner has not established that his completion of a vocational high school diploma...is comparable to a license or certification”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“The wage comparisons for "electronics technician" do not meet the Petitioner's burden to demonstrate he commanded a salary demonstrating exceptional ability”
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 case entirely on the threshold EB-2 exceptional-ability criteria (met only 2 of 6 regulatory categories), and expressly declined to reach any of the three Dhanasar NIW prongs, reserving opinion on them. Notable use of AACRAO EDGE database to evaluate foreign vocational diploma equivalency and wage-comparison website evidence (talent.com, salary.com, indeed.com) discounted as mismatched job title.
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. 103.3
- 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(2)
- 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(3)(iii)
- Matter of L-A-C-
- 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