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 director and producer in advertising and video production, sought a national interest waiver to continue work in his field in the United States; the specifics of his proposed endeavor were not reached by the AAO.
Field: advertising and video production/directing · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — not met
The Petitioner failed to establish five years of progressive post-baccalaureate experience required for advanced-degree equivalency: the letters submitted were not from qualifying 'employers' (one was from his mother/co-owner, another from an outside accountant), the education evaluator did not review employment letters, and the resume, business partner letter, and Brazilian labor/registry documents contained unresolved discrepancies in employment dates and employers. This threshold failure was dispositive; the AAO declined to reach the Dhanasar prongs.
How the evidence was treated
- resume experience · discounted
“The Petitioner must resolve these inconsistencies with independent, objective evidence pointing to where the truth lies.”
AAO decision text - degree · discounted
“The evaluator, however, does not claim to have reviewed any employment letters to establish the Petitioner's work history or experience”
AAO decision text - recommendation letter · discounted
“the regulation requires "letters from current or former employer(s)" and the Petitioner has not established how the signatory of either letter qualifies as an "employer."”
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 AAO resolved the appeal entirely on the threshold advanced-degree-professional issue (failure to show 5 years of progressive post-baccalaureate experience), expressly declining to reach the Dhanasar NIW prongs even though it noted it might otherwise agree with the Director's NIW denial. Key evidentiary problems included a supporting letter from the Petitioner's mother/business co-owner, an education evaluator who never reviewed employment letters, and multiple unresolved date/employer discrepancies across the resume, letters, and Brazilian labor registry documents.
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 Ho
- Matter of L-A-C-
- Poursina v. USCIS
Cases in adjacent profiles
- The Petitioner, a musician and music educator, proposed to advance music education in the United States by opening a pia
- The petitioner, a tattoo artist, sought EB-2 classification as an individual of exceptional ability along with a nationa
- The Petitioner, an MMA athlete and trainer, proposed to operate a jiu jitsu company through which he would train and com
- The Petitioner sought to establish an arts education academy in Ohio, with plans to expand to New York and Michigan, off
- The Petitioner, an art curator, proposed to establish a nonprofit cultural center/platform focused on exhibitions, oral