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 education administrator who founded and ran private schools and colleges in Brazil, sought an EB-2 national interest waiver to continue work in education administration; the specifics of the proposed U.S. endeavor were not reached because the case was decided on threshold eligibility grounds.
Field: education administration / pedagogy · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — not met
The Petitioner's Brazilian Titulo de Licenciado was found to be a two-year teaching qualification, not the foreign equivalent of a U.S. bachelor's degree, defeating advanced-degree-professional eligibility outright. Under the alternative exceptional-ability track, the Petitioner met only one of six regulatory criteria: employment letters failed to establish full-time progressive experience (indeed, claiming four concurrent 40-hour jobs was found 'physically impossible'), the CFEP registration was not a license or professional membership, salary evidence was absent, and recommendation letters were deemed conclusory as to field-level contributions.
How the evidence was treated
- degree · discounted
“where an opinion is not in accord with other information or is in any way questionable, we may discount or give less weight to that evaluation.”
AAO decision text - resume experience · discounted
“Without further evidence or explanation concerning the Petitioner's work hours, we conclude that this evidence is not credible.”
AAO decision text - certification membership · discounted
“the evidence does not establish the Petitioner has a license or certification to practice his occupation.”
AAO decision text - recommendation letter · discounted
“do not sufficiently describe any recognition for achievements and significant contributions to the industry or field.”
AAO decision text - media · discounted
“none of these materials recognize the Petitioner for achievements and significant contributions to the industry or field.”
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 decided the case entirely on threshold EB-2 eligibility grounds (degree equivalency and exceptional-ability criteria) and expressly declined to reach the Dhanasar national-interest-waiver prongs. It noted the Director's RFE contained 'conflicting and confusing statements' and that the Director never analyzed threshold EB-2 eligibility at all. A notable factual finding was that the Petitioner's claim of working four concurrent 40-hour-per-week jobs (160 hours/week) was 'physically impossible' given only 168 hours exist in a week.
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
- Matter of L-A-C-
- Matter of Otiende
- Poursina v. USCIS
Cases in adjacent profiles
- The Petitioner, an assistant professor of Arabic, proposed to continue teaching Levantine-Modern Standard Arabic to U.S.
- The Petitioner, a secondary school teacher, proposed to develop and implement an open educational resource program to ex
- The Petitioner proposed to establish a consulting company in Missouri to design and implement a nationally adaptable tea
- The Petitioner, an arts, drama, and music teacher and entrepreneur, sought EB-2 classification as an individual of excep
- The petitioner, a mathematics teacher with 17 years of experience, proposed to operate a company offering online math tu