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 tattoo artist, sought EB-2 classification as an individual of exceptional ability along with a national interest waiver of the job offer requirement.
Field: tattoo artistry · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — not met
SCOPS and AAO found the petitioner met only one of the three claimed exceptional-ability criteria (membership), and AAO further withdrew that finding, concluding no criteria were satisfied and EB-2 exceptional ability classification was not established.
How the evidence was treated
- degree · discounted
“the record does not establish that the Petitioner's degree in architecture is in the area of exceptional ability”
AAO decision text - certification membership · discounted
“The record does not establish that membership in APT requires a U.S. bachelor's degree or foreign equivalent.”
AAO decision text - awards · discounted
“While these awards demonstrate personal achievements, they do not establish significant contributions to the industry.”
AAO decision text - recommendation letter · discounted
“the letters do not establish significant contributions to the tattoo industry”
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
AAO expressly reserved and declined to reach any of the three Dhanasar NIW prongs because the petitioner failed the threshold EB-2 exceptional-ability classification, citing INS v. Bagamasbad for not making 'purely advisory findings.' The AAO also rejected due-process arguments that SCOPS should have issued an RFE before denying, and rejected the argument that SCOPS erred by not analyzing Dhanasar prongs, holding that failure at the threshold classification stage obviates any NIW analysis. AAO additionally withdrew SCOPS' finding that the professional-association membership criterion was met, finding it was not, after independent review.
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)
- 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(3)(ii)
- 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(3)(iii)
- Flores v. Garland
What this case teaches
Analyst reading of the decision text.
Petitioner failed to meet 3 of 6 exceptional-ability criteria (only arguably academic record and association membership, both rejected); without EB-2 classification, NIW eligibility could not be assessed and Dhanasar was never reached.
Establish underlying EB-2 exceptional-ability/advanced-degree eligibility with criterion-specific evidence (accredited institutions, qualifying professional membership, field-wide impact) before any NIW argument matters.
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, 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
- The Petitioner, an avant-garde pop artist working with a creative partner, sought to run her own art business creating p