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, sought EB-2 classification and a national interest waiver; the specific nature of her proposed endeavor is not discussed in this motion decision, which focuses solely on threshold degree-equivalency issues incorporated from the prior appeal.
Field: fashion/business management · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — not met
The AAO incorporated its prior finding that the Petitioner's fashion degree and business certificate evaluation did not accord with her actual educational transcript (unexplained gaps and missing grades), and that the record failed to establish at least five years of progressive, post-baccalaureate experience needed to equate her credentials to a U.S. master's degree under 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(2).
How the evidence was treated
- degree · discounted
“the evaluation of the Petitioner's education and experience is not in accord with the Petitioner's educational records”
AAO decision text - resume experience · discounted
“the record does not establish that the Petitioner has at least five years of progressive, post-baccalaureate work experience”
AAO decision text - motion resubmission · discounted
“she does not state a new fact regarding how her degree may qualify as equivalent to a U.S. bachelor's degree”
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 petition was denied and appeal dismissed on threshold advanced-degree grounds alone; the NIW prongs were never reached in either the prior appeal or this motion decision. The Petitioner's due-process/constitutional/international-treaty argument on motion to reconsider was rejected as unsupported by any specificity.
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)(2)
- 8 C.F.R. 103.5(a)(3)
- 8 C.F.R. 103.5(a)(4)
- 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(2)
- INA 203(b)(2)
- Matter of Caron Int'l
- Matter of Coelho
- Matter of Ho
What this case teaches
Analyst reading of the decision text.
Petitioner failed on motion to state new facts or show legal/policy error regarding her failure to establish an advanced degree equivalency (bachelor's degree plus five years progressive experience), a threshold eligibility requirement predating any NIW analysis.
Before litigating NIW prongs, ensure foreign credential evaluations match actual transcripts and, if relying on experience equivalency, document at least five years of progressive post-baccalaureate work in the specialty.
vague
person_focused
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