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 entrepreneur with a background in art, proposed to work as a general and operations manager, apparently in connection with a business venture she planned to establish.
Field: art / general and operations management / entrepreneurship · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — not met
AAO adopted and affirmed the Director's finding that although the Petitioner met at least three of the six exceptional ability regulatory criteria, she failed to establish a degree of expertise significantly above that ordinarily encountered in the sciences, arts, or business, based on deficiencies in her education/training records, business plan, employment records, and letters of support.
How the evidence was treated
- recommendation letter · discounted
“noting the lack of relevant details in them and that some of them would not be considered as they were dated after the Form I-140 filing date”
AAO decision text - business plan · discounted
“issues with the feasibility of her business plan”
AAO decision text - resume experience · discounted
“lack of evidence of the Petitioner's prior entrepreneurship experience and of her proposed business being established”
AAO decision text - certification membership · discounted
“do not reflect a degree of expertise significantly above that in her proposed fields”
AAO decision text - awards · discounted
“do not reflect a degree of expertise significantly above that in her proposed fields”
AAO decision text
All 7 evidence items
- media · discounted
“do not reflect a degree of expertise significantly above that in her proposed fields”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“indicates experience in entrepreneurship, the Petitioner has not addressed any of the other deficiencies”
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 concerns the exceptional-ability threshold determination (degree of expertise significantly above that ordinarily encountered), not the NIW prongs themselves; the AAO found the threshold failure dispositive and expressly declined to reach the NIW prong 1-3 arguments. The Petitioner's alternative claim to qualify under the extraordinary ability (EB-1) category was rejected as irrelevant since the petition was not filed under that classification.
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.
- Chen v. INS
- 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