NIW Bearings
dismissedSEP212023_05B52032023-09-21 · 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, a general and operations manager and entrepreneur, sought to work in the sale and marketing of medical devices in the United States.

Field: sales and marketing of medical devices · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

EB-2 threshold — not met

Petitioner satisfied only the experience criterion of the six exceptional-ability categories at 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(3)(ii); membership and recognition-for-achievements criteria were not met, so exceptional ability was not established.

How the evidence was treated

  • certification membership · discounted
    the Petitioner provides no new evidence demonstrating that he maintained his membership from the time of filing through adjudication
    AAO decision text
  • recommendation letter · discounted
    most of the writers are former clients or business associates of the Petitioner, not his peers
    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

Threshold exceptional-ability determination was dispositive; AAO expressly declined to reach the Dhanasar national-interest-waiver prongs, citing INS v. Bagamasbad and Matter of L-A-C- for the principle that agencies need not make advisory findings on unnecessary issues.

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. 103.2(b)(1)
  • 8 C.F.R. 103.3
  • 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(2)
  • 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(3)(ii)
  • 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(3)(iii)
  • Matter of L-A-C-
  • Poursina v. USCIS

Cases in adjacent profiles