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 with a background in business and education administration, sought to continue working in education administration in the United States.
Field: education administration · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — not met
Petitioner did not establish five years of progressive post-baccalaureate experience in his specialty for advanced degree classification, and did not meet at least three of six regulatory criteria for exceptional ability (failing the ten-years full-time experience, license/certification, salary, and significant-contribution criteria).
How the evidence was treated
- resume experience · discounted
“the letters do not state how long the Petitioner was an executive, whether he held any other positions”
AAO decision text - degree · credited
- certification membership · credited
- recommendation letter · discounted
“did not address his qualification under this criterion...we deem the issue waived”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“were only partially translated and therefore not in compliance with 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(3)”
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 decision never reaches the NIW/Dhanasar prongs at all; it is dismissed entirely at the threshold EB-2 classification stage (failure to qualify as either an advanced degree professional or an individual of exceptional ability), with the AAO explicitly declining to analyze the national interest waiver as it 'would serve no meaningful purpose.' An inconsistency between claimed dual employment and a contractor service agreement was used to cast doubt on the reliability of the Petitioner's evidence under Matter of Ho.
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)(3)
- 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(2)
- 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(3)(ii)
- 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(3)(iii)
- INA 203(b)(2)
- INA 291
- Matter of Ho
- 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