NIW Bearings
dismissedOCT082025_03B52032025-10-08 · appeal

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 PhD student in software engineering, proposed to investigate software supply chain repositories using network science methods to uncover security insights and strengthen the security of software projects.

Field: software engineering / software supply chain security · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

EB-2 threshold — not met

Petitioner claimed only three of the six exceptional-ability criteria and needed to satisfy all three; AAO withdrew SCOPS' finding that the professional-membership criterion (8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(3)(ii)(E)) was met because ACM's membership requirements did not limit membership to persons meeting the regulatory definition of 'professional,' leaving petitioner short of three qualifying criteria.

How the evidence was treated

  • degree · credited
  • certification membership · discounted
    the record does not demonstrate the Petitioner's memberships in these organizations qualify as "memberships in professional associations"
    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 withdrew SCOPS' favorable finding on the professional-membership criterion, finding ACM/ACM SIGSOFT membership requirements did not limit membership to those meeting the regulatory 'professional' definition; because this left the Petitioner short of the required three criteria, the AAO expressly reserved discussion of the remaining criterion and declined to reach the Dhanasar national interest waiver analysis, citing INS v. Bagamasbad's rule against advisory findings on unnecessary issues.

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. 103.3
  • 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)
  • Flores v. Garland
  • USCIS Policy Manual F.5(B)(2)

Cases in adjacent profiles