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 sought to work as an entrepreneur providing advisory, consultancy, and agricultural management training services to coffee-producing companies and farmers.
Field: agriculture / coffee production and rural property management · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — not met
Petitioner met at least three of the six exceptional ability criteria (academic record, experience, membership) but failed the final merits determination showing a degree of expertise significantly above that ordinarily encountered as a rural property manager or entrepreneur in the coffee industry; also insufficient evidence of salary demonstrating exceptional ability.
How the evidence was treated
- recommendation letter · discounted
“the Director found this evidence inadequate to demonstrate significant contributions to his field”
AAO decision text - resume experience · discounted
“does not establish that his work has had an impact at a level indicative of achievements and significant contributions to the industry”
AAO decision text - certification membership · discounted
“the record does not demonstrate how his ... membership in professional associations ... sets him apart from other rural property managers”
AAO decision text - media · discounted
“an article referencing his accomplishments as a ranch manager ... this evidence inadequate to demonstrate significant contributions to his field”
AAO decision text - degree · discounted
“the record does not demonstrate how his academic record ... sets him apart from other rural property managers or entrepreneurs”
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
This is an exceptional-ability EB-2 case (not advanced degree) where the AAO affirmed the Director's finding that the Petitioner failed the threshold exceptional-ability final merits determination, and expressly reserved/declined to reach the Dhanasar NIW prongs entirely, citing INS v. Bagamasbad and Matter of L-A-C- for the principle that agencies need not address unnecessary alternative issues.
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)
- Flores v. Garland
- Matter of L-A-C-
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