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 electrical engineer specializing in electric vehicle technology, sought to serve as Director of a proposed joint venture bringing his industry expertise and patented EV technology to build electric vehicles in the United States.
Field: electrical engineering / electric vehicle technology · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — not met
Petitioner failed to establish five years of progressive post-baccalaureate experience in the specialty required for advanced degree professional classification; employment letters and certificates lacked descriptions of job duties and did not cover a full five-year post-baccalaureate period.
How the evidence was treated
- resume experience · discounted
“self-serving and does not provide independent, objective evidence of his prior work experience”
AAO decision text - recommendation letter · discounted
“The letter does not describe the Petitioner's duties in an specific position.”
AAO decision text - degree · credited
- motion resubmission · discounted
“He did not submit new employment letters or any additional evidence to document his five years”
AAO decision text - media · discounted
“the articles do not address the specific proposed endeavor”
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
AAO found threshold EB-2 eligibility dispositive and declined to reach the Dhanasar prongs, but included a footnote stating that even if it had addressed the remaining issues, it would still have dismissed the appeal, noting the Director had found substantial merit met but national importance, prong 2, and prong 3 not met, and that Petitioner's appeal evidence (news/journal articles) did not address the specific proposed endeavor. Also flagged an unresolved overlapping employment discrepancy for any future filings.
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.
- INA 203(b)(2)
- Matter of Ho
- Matter of L-A-C-
- Poursina v. USCIS
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