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 Oracle EBS consultant working for a large multinational IT/conglomerate employer, sought to continue providing IT consulting and systems implementation services in the United States.
Field: Oracle EBS / IT consulting · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — not met
Petitioner claimed exceptional ability but only satisfied two of the six regulatory criteria (official academic record and ten years' experience); failed to establish recognition of achievements and significant contributions to the field under 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(3)(ii)(F). Advanced-degree professional eligibility was waived as unaddressed.
How the evidence was treated
- recommendation letter · discounted
“the letters did not establish that the Petitioner's contribution went beyond being a dedicated and competent employee”
AAO decision text - contract revenue · discounted
“did not demonstrate recognition for achievements and significant contributions to his field”
AAO decision text - resume experience · credited
- degree · credited
- motion resubmission · discounted
“he...repeats the salient points of his experience and relies on the same evidence we discussed in our prior decision”
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
The NIW prongs were never reached because the AAO's underlying appellate decision had already found the Petitioner ineligible for the EB-2 classification itself (exceptional ability criteria); this motion to reconsider addressed only that threshold eligibility issue and was dismissed for failing to identify legal or factual error, citing Matter of O-S-G- and declining, per Bagamasbad and Matter of L-A-C-, to make advisory NIW findings.
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)(3)
- 8 C.F.R. 103.5(a)(4)
- 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(3)(ii)
- Matter of L-A-C-
- Matter of O-S-G-
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