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, described as an entrepreneur, sought EB-2 classification as an individual of exceptional ability along with a national interest waiver, though the specific nature of his proposed endeavor is not described in this decision.
EB-2 threshold — addressed
AAO's prior decision found initial evidence of exceptional ability missing from the record; on motion, Petitioner showed this evidence was in fact submitted, so the threshold issue is remanded to SCOPS for evaluation rather than resolved here.
How the evidence was treated
- motion resubmission · credited
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 reach the NIW prongs at all; it concerns a threshold EB-2 exceptional-ability evidentiary dispute. AAO's prior appellate decision was itself flawed: SCOPS had erroneously evaluated the Petitioner under the advanced-degree standard despite his claiming exceptional ability, and never actually assessed exceptional ability. On motion, Petitioner proved (via a UPS shipping label showing an 11-pound, 1,000+ page package) that the initial evidence had in fact been submitted but was missing from the record reviewed on appeal. AAO withdrew its prior appellate decision and remanded to SCOPS to evaluate exceptional ability criteria and, if met, conduct a final merits determination before reaching NIW eligibility.
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. 103.5
- Matter of Coelho
What this case teaches
Analyst reading of the decision text.
AAO found petitioner had in fact submitted initial evidence (proof of 11-lb package delivery) supporting exceptional-ability eligibility that was erroneously absent from the prior record, requiring SCOPS to evaluate it before any NIW merits determination.
Always retain proof of delivery/filing completeness; if initial evidence is lost or overlooked, a motion to reopen with documentary proof of submission can compel remand even after appeal dismissal.
vague
mixed
Cases in adjacent profiles
- The Beneficiary proposed to establish an asset investment management and compliance advisory firm in New York offering c
- The Petitioner proposed to develop and commercialize zeolite-based products in the United States, including agricultural
- The Petitioner proposed to operate a medical billing and healthcare revenue cycle management firm in the United States,
- The Petitioner proposed to establish and lead as CEO a cybersecurity and crisis management company in Florida, offering
- The Petitioner proposed to establish and operate an IT consultancy company in Michigan providing cloud migration, cybers