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 architect trained in Russia, sought an EB-2 NIW classification, but the decision does not describe her proposed U.S. endeavor in any detail; the AAO itself noted the record lacked sufficient information about the endeavor to assess it.
Field: architecture / architectural engineering · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — not met
The record did not establish that the Petitioner's 2000 or 2006 foreign diplomas were equivalent to a U.S. bachelor's or advanced degree; the submitted opinion letter was not an independent or properly authoritative credentials evaluation. The AAO withdrew the Director's finding that the advanced-degree requirement was met and remanded for further development of the record rather than affirming or reversing outright.
How the evidence was treated
- degree · discounted
“the 2006 diploma does not indicate the corresponding academic level”
AAO decision text - recommendation letter · discounted
“The prior working relationship between the Petitioner and the opinion letter author precludes the letter from being an independent evaluation”
AAO decision text - certification membership · ignored
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 reach any Dhanasar prong analysis; it is confined entirely to the threshold advanced-degree equivalency question. The AAO withdrew the Director's finding that the advanced degree requirement was met (rather than affirming or overturning it outright) and remanded for a new merits determination, expressly declining to opine on the ultimate outcome. A footnote also flags that the record lacked sufficient information about the proposed endeavor to analyze the Dhanasar prongs at all, foreshadowing further issues on remand.
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. 103.2(b)(1)
- 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(2)
What this case teaches
Analyst reading of the decision text.
Case remanded because the Director's decision on advanced-degree eligibility was unreviewable (unsupported finding of a master's degree) and the record lacked evidence of the proposed endeavor to even assess Dhanasar prongs.
Establish foreign degree equivalency with an independent, properly qualified credentials evaluation, and clearly articulate the specific proposed endeavor before NIW merits can be assessed.
vague
person_focused
Cases in adjacent profiles
- The Petitioner, an aircraft mechanic and instructor, proposed to enhance aviation maintenance training programs, support
- The Petitioner seeks EB-2 classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree with a national inter
- The petitioner sought an EB-2 national interest waiver of the job offer requirement, but the substance of the proposed e
- The Beneficiary, sponsored by a private airline, sought EB-2 classification as an individual of exceptional ability in a
- The petitioner sought an EB-2 national interest waiver as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree; the sp