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, a sports development consultant, proposed to create partnerships between sports organizations, educational institutions, and government agencies to develop underfunded Olympic sports (e.g., female boxing, sambo, kickboxing) in the United States.
Field: sports development consulting · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — not met
AAO withdrew the Director's finding that the Petitioner qualifies as an advanced degree professional, citing an inadequate/unpersuasive credentials evaluation and unresolved inconsistencies in the Petitioner's claimed education history across multiple immigration filings.
Prong 1 — national importancenot established
“the record does not appear to sufficiently substantiate the nature of the Petitioner's specific proposed endeavor(s)”
“The lack of detail regarding the specific activities that the Petitioner will pursue in his endeavor, and how he will carry through on these planned activities in the United States, raises questions”
“many of these activities appear to fall far afield of tasks that a "management analyst" would typically perform”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- degree · discounted
“the submitted evaluation does not credibly offer an analytical roadmap that persuasively lays out the basis for the evaluator's opinions”
AAO decision text - resume experience · discounted
“Doubt cast on any aspect of the Petitioner's [evidence] may... lead to a reevaluation of the reliability and sufficiency of the remaining evidence”
AAO decision text - business plan · discounted
“The lack of detail regarding the specific activities that the Petitioner will pursue in his endeavor... raises questions regarding whether he has offered sufficient information”
AAO decision text
Where this case turned
- Endeavor too vague · p1 — described as a job role, not a defined undertaking
Notable
The AAO remanded rather than dismissing, identifying multiple unresolved issues: a deficient credentials evaluation, significant inconsistencies in the Petitioner's education history across different immigration filings (ETA-750B, appeal brief, employment workbook, and two DOS visa applications listing different course titles and dates), and vagueness in the proposed endeavor. The AAO agreed with the Director's (unfavorable) conclusions on prongs 2 and 3 without further discussion, an unusual posture given the overall remand.
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.
- Kazarian v. USCIS
- Matter of Ho
- Poursina v. USCIS
What this case teaches
Analyst reading of the decision text.
Underlying EB-2 advanced-degree eligibility was unresolved due to a deficient credentials evaluation and unexplained inconsistencies, and the proposed endeavor itself was too vaguely and inconsistently described to assess national importance.
Ensure credentials evaluations address the full degree chain and resolve all record inconsistencies; define one stable, specific endeavor with concrete national-scale impact evidence, not a shifting task list.
vague
field_advancement · economic_job_creation · economic_growth_generic
person_focused
Cases in adjacent profiles
- The Petitioner proposed to work as an IT consultant in the United States, providing cybersecurity and digital transforma
- The petitioner proposed to establish his own company providing specialized business consultancy, auditing, and training
- The petitioner proposed to work as a consultant engineer through his own company, specializing in development projects t
- The Petitioner proposed to start a project management consultancy in the United States that would help small and mid-siz
- The Petitioner proposed to establish a legal consultancy in the United States focused on alternative dispute resolution