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.
A mechanical and aerospace engineer sought to continue specialized research (in a redacted computational/aerothermal subfield) developing numerical tools and methods to analyze aerothermal problems, with applications spanning aircraft aerodynamics, gas turbines, and related fields.
Field: mechanical and aerospace engineering · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — addressed
Petitioner's Ph.D., master's, and foreign engineering degrees established qualification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree; not disputed.
Prong 1 — national importanceestablished
Prong 2 — well positionednot established · dispositive
“he did not provide specific examples indicating that this system has been utilized in the fields of aerospace”
“The Petitioner, however, has not sufficiently demonstrated that his published and presented work in the area of”
“As the record is insufficient to demonstrate that the Petitioner is well positioned to advance his proposed research endeavor”
“he does not demonstrate how any of the cited material provides comparable citation statistics that can be used as a basis for comparison”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- recommendation letter · discounted
“did not provide specific examples indicating that ... otherwise represents a record of success in his field”
AAO decision text - citations publications · discounted
“does not offer comparative statistics showing the significance of this level of citation within his field”
AAO decision text - degree · discounted
“education is merely one factor among many that may contribute to such a finding”
AAO decision text - resume experience · discounted
“does not offer specific examples of how the Petitioner's work ... otherwise represents a record of success in his field”
AAO decision text
Where this case turned
- Citations insufficient · p2 — citation counts without qualitative account of impact
- Education alone insufficient · p2 — degrees offered as positioning — credentials are not a track record
- Letters conclusory · p2 — letters praise skills in general terms without tracing specific impact
- Letters not independent · p2 — letters come from employers and close collaborators, not independent experts
- Record of success insufficient · p2 — a claimed track record the documents do not establish
Notable
The Petitioner cited non-precedent AAO decisions approving NIWs despite low citation counts; the AAO rejected reliance on non-precedent decisions as non-binding and factually undistinguished. The AAO also questioned the relevance of a Norwegian academic publication-rate study to the Petitioner's citation comparison. The decision expressly declines to reach prong three because prong two alone is dispositive.
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(c)
- Poursina v. USCIS
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