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 food industry, proposed a business endeavor in that sector, though the specific nature of the endeavor is not detailed in this decision.
Field: food industry · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — addressed
The Director found the Petitioner eligible for EB-2 classification as an advanced degree professional; this was not disputed.
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 decision does not substantively evaluate the merits of any Dhanasar prong. The AAO withdraws the Director's denial solely because the Director's decision failed to analyze the submitted evidence and did not explain the reasons for denial, violating the requirement that denials sufficiently explain deficiencies to permit meaningful appellate review. The AAO explicitly notes the Director never addressed prong two at all, and corrects the Petitioner's mistaken claim that the Director had found prong two satisfied. The matter is remanded for a new decision on all three prongs and EB-2 eligibility.
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
- 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(2)
- INA 203(b)(2)
What this case teaches
Analyst reading of the decision text.
The Director's denial was procedurally deficient: it failed to analyze submitted evidence or explain why it was insufficient under any Dhanasar prong, precluding meaningful appellate review.
Adjudicators must specifically analyze record evidence against each Dhanasar prong; conclusory insufficiency findings without explanation are remandable regardless of merits.
vague
mixed
Cases in adjacent profiles
- The Beneficiary proposed to establish an asset investment management and compliance advisory firm in New York offering c
- The Petitioner proposed to develop and commercialize zeolite-based products in the United States, including agricultural
- The Petitioner proposed to operate a medical billing and healthcare revenue cycle management firm in the United States,
- The Petitioner proposed to establish and lead as CEO a cybersecurity and crisis management company in Florida, offering
- The Petitioner proposed to establish and operate an IT consultancy company in Michigan providing cloud migration, cybers