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, working as a personal assistant to a law firm's chairman/CEO, sought EB-2 classification as a general and operations manager based on claimed exceptional ability, with a national interest waiver of the job offer requirement.
Field: general and operations management · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — not met
The Petitioner failed to satisfy at least three of the six exceptional-ability criteria; specifically the employment letters did not document 10 years of experience in the same or similar occupation, and recommendation letters did not show recognized achievements or significant contributions. Because the Petitioner met only one criterion (academic record), the threshold EB-2 exceptional ability classification was not established, making the failure dispositive and the NIW prongs unreached.
How the evidence was treated
- resume experience · discounted
“none of the experience the Petitioner documents was in an occupation same or similar to that of a general and operations manager”
AAO decision text - recommendation letter · discounted
“these statements are not supported by any evidence in the record which reflects that these are noteworthy as achievements and significant contributions”
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
The AAO expressly declined to reach the Dhanasar national interest waiver prongs because the threshold exceptional-ability classification was not established; the decision is entirely a threshold EB-2 exceptional-ability analysis with the NIW framework only summarized in the Law section.
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. 204.5(k)(2)
- 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(3)(ii)
- 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(3)(iii)
- Matter of L-A-C-
- Matter of Y-B-
- USCIS Policy Manual F.5(B)(2)
Cases in adjacent profiles
- The Petitioner, a mechanical engineer, proposed to advance thermal management solutions for high-power, compact, and rel
- The Petitioner, a senior engineering program manager specializing in electromechanical systems, proposed to advance moto
- The Petitioner proposed to provide innovative solutions to optimize freight and vessel operations in the U.S. shipping i
- The Petitioner, a sales manager, proposed an endeavor in the United States for which he sought an EB-2 national interest
- The Petitioner proposed to lead a nationwide initiative to develop and implement a standardized materials management mod