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 sought to work in marketing and sales, including business development activities through a company he was associated with, though the specific national-interest endeavor was not reached by the AAO.
Field: marketing and sales · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — not met
Petitioner failed to establish a qualifying advanced degree or foreign equivalent degree, failed to show five years of progressive post-baccalaureate experience, and failed to meet at least three of the exceptional ability regulatory criteria (only two of six were satisfied).
How the evidence was treated
- degree · discounted
“the Petitioner has not demonstrated that he has "a foreign equivalent degree" to either a U.S. advanced degree or a U.S. baccalaureate degree”
AAO decision text - resume experience · discounted
“None of the aforementioned letters, however, indicates the specific period of the Petitioner's employment”
AAO decision text - recommendation letter · discounted
“None of their letters, however, states that the Petitioner's experience was "full-time" or provides the specific period”
AAO decision text - certification membership · credited
- contract revenue · discounted
“This evidence, however, does not cover a time period indicating that the Petitioner has accrued at least five years”
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 declined to reach the Dhanasar prongs entirely because the Petitioner failed to establish the underlying EB-2 classification (advanced degree or exceptional ability), making the threshold failure dispositive of the entire appeal. The decision extensively analyzes an 'Expert Opinion Evaluation of Work Experience' credential evaluation and multiple employer letters, finding all insufficiently specific as to dates and duties.
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)
- 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