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 Brazilian professor with degrees in tourism, law, and urban biology, initially proposed to teach and guide future legal practitioners as a law and environmental sustainability professor, and on appeal expanded this to include creating a human-rights school program, fundraising from international organizations, and advising human-rights organizations.
Field: law and environmental sustainability · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — not met
AAO agreed with the Director that the Petitioner did not establish ten years of full-time qualifying experience (8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(3)(ii)(B)) or recognition for achievements and significant contributions (204.5(k)(3)(ii)(F)), but remanded for the Director to newly consider a foreign degree equivalency evaluation, bar license/registration evidence, and membership evidence submitted for the first time on appeal.
Prong 1 — national importanceestablished
“the record does not demonstrate the context in which the Petitioner proposes to work as a law professor”
“The endeavor on appeal differs from the initially described proposed endeavor.”
“A petitioner may not make material changes to a petition in an effort to make a deficient petition conform to USCIS requirements.”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- degree · credited
- certification membership · credited
- recommendation letter · discounted
“none of the authors provide detailed explanations of how the Petitioner's work represents achievements and significant contributions to the industry or field”
AAO decision text - resume experience · discounted
“the letters do not sufficiently demonstrate the Petitioner has (1) at least ten years of full-time experience and (2) that her experience is in the occupation”
AAO decision text - awards · discounted
“they do not show how this appreciation represents recognition for achievements and significant contributions to the industry or field”
AAO decision text
All 6 evidence items
- citations publications · discounted
“the Petitioner did not provide a detailed explanation of the relevance this evidence has to her eligibility for the EB-2 classification”
AAO decision text
Where this case turned
- Endeavor too vague · p1 — described as a job role, not a defined undertaking
- Material change of endeavor · p1 — the endeavor described on appeal is not the one filed
Notable
Unusual remand posture: AAO withdrew the denial not because it found the case affirmatively eligible, but because the Petitioner submitted substantial new evidence on appeal (foreign degree equivalency evaluation, bar registration, membership, conferences/articles) that the Director never had a chance to review; AAO also flagged that the Petitioner's appellate description of the endeavor (school program, fundraising, advising) materially differed from the initial proposal (teaching as a law professor), citing Matter of Izummi and Matter of Michelin Tire Corp. on material changes, and instructed the Director to assess whether this constitutes an impermissible new set of facts.
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.
- Matter of Izummi
- Poursina v. USCIS
- USCIS Policy Manual F.5(B)(2)
What this case teaches
Analyst reading of the decision text.
Threshold EB-2 classification (advanced degree/exceptional ability) unresolved due to unreviewed appellate evidence, and proposed endeavor materially changed on appeal, precluding national importance analysis.
Define the proposed endeavor's specific context and scope at filing; do not substantively alter the endeavor on appeal, as this triggers material-change and remand concerns.
vague
field_advancement · other
person_focused
Cases in adjacent profiles
- The Petitioner, an assistant professor of Arabic, proposed to continue teaching Levantine-Modern Standard Arabic to U.S.
- The Petitioner, a secondary school teacher, proposed to develop and implement an open educational resource program to ex
- The Petitioner proposed to establish a consulting company in Missouri to design and implement a nationally adaptable tea
- The Petitioner, an arts, drama, and music teacher and entrepreneur, sought EB-2 classification as an individual of excep
- The petitioner, a mathematics teacher with 17 years of experience, proposed to operate a company offering online math tu