NIW Bearings
remandedSEP032024_06B52032024-09-03 · appeal · Texas Service Center

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 environmental consultant, sought EB-2 classification and a national interest waiver, though the decision does not detail the specific endeavor beyond his occupation.

Field: environmental consulting · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

EB-2 threshold — addressed

The Director's decision did not clearly assess whether Petitioner met EB-2 classification requirements; the record did not support the RFE's characterization that he had a bachelor's degree and five years of progressive experience, and Petitioner instead submitted evidence oriented toward an extraordinary ability claim. AAO remanded for the Director to properly determine EB-2 eligibility in the first instance.

Prong 2 — well positionedestablished

“The Director mentioned the evidence submitted, but only stated that there was "a lack of evidence supporting claims made" in the Petitioner's letters of recommendation but did not provide a specific explanation or analysis of the evidence that was provided.”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

  • recommendation letter · discounted
    “a lack of evidence supporting claims made”
    AAO decision text
  • degree · ignored

Where this case turned

  • Letters conclusory · p2 — letters praise skills in general terms without tracing specific impact
838coded decisions carry the failure named in this record. A placement shows where your profile sits among them, not what it predicts.See where your profile sits — 90 seconds →

Notable

The AAO found the Director committed multiple errors: she referenced evidentiary requirements for Dhanasar prong 2 as though they were part of the form's initial-evidence instructions, failed to determine whether Petitioner met the underlying EB-2 classification (despite record evidence undermining the RFE's assumption of a bachelor's degree, with Petitioner instead claiming an extraordinary-ability track and an incomplete Aquaculture Engineering program), and gave only a conclusory dismissal of the recommendation letters without analysis. The matter was remanded rather than resolved on the merits of any Dhanasar prong.

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
  • INA 203(b)(2)

What this case teaches

Analyst reading of the decision text.

Decisive factor

AAO found Director erred by requesting prong-2 evidence under wrong form instructions, failing to determine EB-2 underlying eligibility, and giving conclusory unexplained rejection of well-positioned evidence.

Transferable lesson

Ensure underlying EB-2 eligibility (degree/experience or exceptional ability) is clearly documented before NIW prongs are adjudicated; demand reasoned analysis, not conclusory findings.

Endeavor framing

moderate

National-importance theory

other

Evidence targeting

mixed

Cases in adjacent profiles

← Back to the case explorer