Good news — this case cleared the first bar
The AAO withdrew the Director's denial and remanded for further consideration because the Director incorrectly found the petitioner qualified as an advanced degree professional without adequate analysis, failed to evaluate evidence of exceptional ability submitted in the RFE response, and did not conduct a proper Dhanasar three-prong analysis of the national interest waiver claim.
The petitioner, a flight simulator engineer with 24 years of experience, sought an EB-2 National Interest Waiver to continue his work and teach others in the field. The Nebraska Service Center Director denied the petition but made several errors: incorrectly finding the petitioner qualified as an advanced degree professional despite holding only an associate's degree equivalent, failing to evaluate exceptional ability evidence submitted in the RFE response, and not performing the required Dhanasar three-prong NIW analysis. The AAO withdrew the denial and remanded the case, directing the Director to properly assess whether the petitioner qualifies under EB-2 (either as an advanced degree professional or via exceptional ability) and then to fully analyze the NIW claim under the Dhanasar framework.
What worked: The petitioner's personal statement describing his proposed endeavor—continuing flight simulator maintenance and teaching new technicians—was found sufficiently specific to satisfy the 'specific undertaking' threshold under Dhanasar, contrary to the Director's finding.
What failed: The petitioner's educational credentials (an associate's degree equivalent) fell short of the U.S. bachelor's degree required for advanced degree professional status, and the record lacked supporting evidence for his claim of holding a bachelor's degree equivalent. The Director's failure to evaluate the RFE-response evidence means the exceptional ability claim remains unresolved.
Takeaway: For EB-2 NIW petitions, petitioners with non-traditional educational backgrounds should provide thorough documentation of how their education combined with experience meets the bachelor's degree equivalency standard under Matter of Sea, Inc., and should clearly articulate their proposed endeavor in specific terms to facilitate a complete Dhanasar analysis.
Cases like this are frequently used by attorneys when responding to RFEs or building initial petitions. The evidence patterns that worked (or failed) here directly reflect what USCIS officers look for when evaluating EB-2-NIW criteria.
● Evidence that moved the needle
- The petitioner's personal statement describing his proposed endeavor—continuing flight simulator maintenance and teaching new technicians—was found sufficiently specific to satisfy the 'specific undertaking' threshold under Dhanasar, contrary to the Director's finding.
● Evidence that wasn't enough alone
- The petitioner's educational credentials (an associate's degree equivalent) fell short of the U.S
- bachelor's degree required for advanced degree professional status, and the record lacked supporting evidence for his claim of holding a bachelor's degree equivalent
- The Director's failure to evaluate the RFE-response evidence means the exceptional ability claim remains unresolved.
Petitioner's personal statement describing a proposed endeavor involving flight simulator maintenance and teaching/training new technicians in independent training centers, aviation maintenance schools, and colleges was found sufficient to identify a 'specific undertaking' under Dhanasar.
Educational credential evaluation stating petitioner earned only the equivalent of a U.S. associate's degree was insufficient to establish advanced degree professional status.
Petitioner's unsupported claim to hold the equivalent of a U.S. bachelor's degree lacked corroborating evidence in the record.
Director incorrectly concluded the petitioner qualifies as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree despite the record showing only an associate's degree and no analysis of whether education plus experience equated to a bachelor's degree equivalent under Matter of Sea, Inc.
Director failed to evaluate the additional exceptional ability evidence the petitioner submitted in response to the RFE.
Director did not conduct a Dhanasar three-prong national interest waiver analysis, instead dismissing the petitioner's proposed endeavor as insufficiently specific without substantive review of the supporting evidence.
Completed
I-140 filed
Flight simulator engineer and maintenance technician with 24 years of experience; aspires to also teach and train new technicians in aviation maintenance settings
Completed
Director — Denied
Initial decision: Denied.
Completed
Appeal to the AAO
Petitioner appealed to the Administrative Appeals Office for de novo review.
2021-07-15
AAO decision — Remanded
The AAO withdrew the Director's denial and remanded for further consideration because the Director incorrectly found the petitioner qualified as an advanced degree professional without adequate analysis, failed to evaluate evidence of exceptional ability submitted in the RFE response, and did not conduct a proper Dhanasar three-prong analysis of the national interest waiver claim.
If you're appealing a similar decision, I-290B must be filed within 30 days of personal service of the denial, or 33 days if mailed.
Find this useful? A coffee helps keep Case Reviewer free and ad-free.
Buy me a coffee