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 sought to operate/develop a business venture in the bars and restaurants industry, pursuing EB-2 classification as an individual of exceptional ability with an accompanying national interest waiver.
Field: bars and restaurants industry · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — not met
Petitioner abandoned his EB-2 exceptional-ability classification claim by failing to contest the Director's denial on appeal; subsequent motions did not provide new facts or show legal error on this issue, so the classification failure was never overcome.
How the evidence was treated
- resume experience · discounted
“he had not offered new facts supported by affidavits or other documentary evidence”
AAO decision text - business plan · discounted
“he had not offered new facts supported by affidavits or other documentary evidence”
AAO decision text - degree · discounted
“does not establish that we erred in dismissing the Petitioner's prior motion to reopen”
AAO decision text - motion resubmission · discounted
“The Petitioner's contentions in his current motion merely reargue facts and issues we have already considered”
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
This decision never reaches the NIW prongs at all. The petition failed entirely on the threshold EB-2 exceptional-ability classification issue, which the Petitioner abandoned on appeal by not contesting it, and successive motions to reopen/reconsider were dismissed purely on procedural grounds (no new facts; no showing of legal/factual error) rather than any substantive re-examination of national interest waiver 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. 103.5(a)(2)
- 8 C.F.R. 103.5(a)(3)
- 8 C.F.R. 103.5(a)(4)
- Matter of Coelho
- Matter of O-R-E-
- Matter of O-S-G-
- Matter of R-A-M-
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