NIW Bearings
dismissedSEP092024_08B52032024-09-09 · combined · 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 entrepreneur in the field of online instruction, sought EB-2 classification as an individual of exceptional ability along with a national interest waiver of the job offer requirement.

Field: online instruction · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

EB-2 threshold — not met

Prior appellate decision found the Petitioner did not qualify as an individual of exceptional ability after discussing all six evidentiary criteria; on motion the Petitioner failed to show that finding was based on an incorrect application of law or policy or to identify overlooked evidence.

How the evidence was treated

  • motion resubmission · discounted
    the Petitioner does not identify a new fact, nor does he submit documentary evidence of such a fact
    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

This is a motion decision, not a merits appeal; the AAO declined to reach the NIW/Dhanasar prongs because the Petitioner remained ineligible for the underlying EB-2 exceptional-ability classification, citing INS v. Bagamasbad and Matter of L-A-C- for declining to address unnecessary issues. The Petitioner also raised an undeveloped Fourth Amendment claim that the AAO summarily rejected for lack of explanation.

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. 103.5(a)(1)(ii)
  • 8 C.F.R. 103.5(a)(2)
  • 8 C.F.R. 103.5(a)(3)
  • 8 C.F.R. 103.5(a)(4)
  • Matter of Coelho
  • Matter of L-A-C-

Cases in adjacent profiles