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 audio-video editor, filmmaker, and producer from Brazil, sought to continue work in audio-video editing and film/media production in the United States.
Field: audio-video editing, filmmaking, and production · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — not met
Petitioner failed to establish either an advanced degree (foreign 3-year Titulo de Licenciado not equivalent to U.S. bachelor's, and credential evaluations found unpersuasive) or exceptional ability (met only 2 of 6 required criteria: license/certification, salary, professional membership, and recognition criteria all failed).
How the evidence was treated
- degree · discounted
“the evaluation lacks a logical, documented analysis sufficient to show that the Petitioner has earned the U.S. equivalent”
AAO decision text - certification membership · discounted
“Neither the card nor the quoted articles from the syndicate indicate that membership constitutes either a license to practice a profession or a certification”
AAO decision text - resume experience · discounted
“The record does not include salary information for careers similar to the Petitioner's career during the years identified on his tax documents”
AAO decision text - recommendation letter · discounted
“without more detailed explanations about the Petitioner's specific contributions to the industry or field that are supported by documentary evidence”
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
Decision resolved entirely at the threshold EB-2 eligibility stage (advanced degree/exceptional ability); AAO expressly declined to reach the Dhanasar three-prong NIW analysis as unnecessary. Notable detailed discussion of foreign credential evaluation methodology (AACRAO EDGE database, '3-for-1 Rule' argument rejected) and a harmless-error finding regarding a scrivener's error (missing 'not') in the Director's denial letter.
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)
- Matter of Caron Int'l
- Matter of L-A-C-
- Matter of O-R-E-
- Poursina v. USCIS
What this case teaches
Analyst reading of the decision text.
Petitioner failed to establish underlying EB-2 eligibility as either an advanced-degree professional (foreign degree equivalency insufficient) or individual of exceptional ability (met only 2 of 6 criteria), making the NIW analysis unnecessary.
Secure rigorous, well-documented credential equivalency evaluations and satisfy all EB-2 threshold criteria before investing in Dhanasar national-interest arguments, which are moot without base eligibility.
vague
person_focused
Cases in adjacent profiles
- The Petitioner, a musician and music educator, proposed to advance music education in the United States by opening a pia
- The petitioner, a tattoo artist, sought EB-2 classification as an individual of exceptional ability along with a nationa
- The Petitioner, an MMA athlete and trainer, proposed to operate a jiu jitsu company through which he would train and com
- The Petitioner sought to establish an arts education academy in Ohio, with plans to expand to New York and Michigan, off
- The Petitioner, an art curator, proposed to establish a nonprofit cultural center/platform focused on exhibitions, oral