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 interior designer with 24+ years of experience, sought to continue her career in the U.S. as CEO/entrepreneur of her own interior design company, providing residential and corporate design services initially targeting Brazilian and Latin American communities.
Field: interior design · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — not met
Petitioner met only 1 of 3 required exceptional-ability criteria (academic record); failed to establish 10 years full-time experience via employer letters, professional association membership at time of filing, and recognition for achievements/contributions to the field. This failure was dispositive; AAO did not reach the Dhanasar NIW prongs.
How the evidence was treated
- resume experience · discounted
“the Petitioner's statement referencing the evidence she submitted is not sufficient to demonstrate this criterion.”
AAO decision text - certification membership · discounted
“the Petitioner has not offered documentation showing her membership in a professional association at the time of filing, as required.”
AAO decision text - recommendation letter · discounted
“they do not provide information on how the Petitioner's experience in the field equates to achievements and significant contributions to the industry or field recognized by peers, governmental entities, or professional or business organizations.”
AAO decision text - business plan · ignored
“the Petitioner did not persuasively explain why the standards do not readily apply to her occupation. As such, this evidence will not be considered.”
AAO decision text - degree · 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
AAO expressly reserved judgment on all three Dhanasar prongs because the Petitioner failed the threshold exceptional-ability showing, citing INS v. Bagamasbad and Matter of L-A-C- for declining to reach unnecessary 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. 103.2(b)(1)
- 8 C.F.R. 103.3
- Flores v. Garland
- Kazarian v. USCIS
- Matter of Katigbak
- Matter of L-A-C-
- USCIS Policy Manual F.5(B)(2)
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