This appeal was not successful at this stage
The appeal was dismissed because the petitioner failed to submit a qualifying offer of employment predating the petition filing, and failed to demonstrate the beneficiary had three years of qualifying teaching or research experience.
The petitioner, a university, sought EB-1B classification for a beneficiary working as an assistant professor of speech-language pathology. The Texas Service Center denied the petition for lack of a qualifying job offer and insufficient teaching experience. On appeal, the AAO agreed on both grounds: the only offer letter submitted post-dated the petition filing and therefore could not satisfy the requirement that initial evidence accompany the petition, and neither the I-140 form nor its cover letter constituted a valid offer letter to the beneficiary. As to experience, the prior employer's letter was vague about duties and did not establish full course responsibility, and the beneficiary's prior admission to a CBP officer that she worked as a speech pathologist (not a professor) further undermined the teaching experience claim. The evidentiary criteria under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(i)(3)(i) were not addressed by either party and thus not before the AAO.
What failed: The employer submitted the job offer letter after the petition was filed, which disqualified it as initial evidence. The prior employer's letter was too vague—it did not describe specific teaching duties or confirm the beneficiary had full responsibility for any course. The beneficiary's own admission to immigration officials that she worked as a speech pathologist (not a faculty member) at her prior employer further weakened the experience claim.
Takeaway: For EB-1B petitions, ensure a formal employment offer letter is prepared and dated before filing, and that experience letters from prior employers clearly detail specific teaching or research duties including full course responsibility, especially when experience was gained during a degree program.
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-1B criteria.
● Evidence that moved the needle
- See summary above for details.
● Evidence that wasn't enough alone
- The employer submitted the job offer letter after the petition was filed, which disqualified it as initial evidence
- The prior employer's letter was too vague—it did not describe specific teaching duties or confirm the beneficiary had full responsibility for any course
- The beneficiary's own admission to immigration officials that she worked as a speech pathologist (not a faculty member) at her prior employer further weakened the experience claim.
Petitioner's own letter documenting beneficiary's approximately 2 years and 8 months of teaching employment with the petitioner was found credible.
Beneficiary's admission to CBP officer in 2019 that she worked as a speech pathologist (not a professor) under TN status was accepted as undermining the qualifying nature of her prior teaching experience claim.
Renewal appointment letter dated March 15, 2024 (post-filing) was rejected as a qualifying offer of employment because it did not exist at the time the petition was filed.
Form I-140 and cover letter addressed to USCIS were rejected as qualifying offers of employment because they were not letters offering employment directly to the beneficiary.
Letter from prior employer describing beneficiary's role as instructor and clinical supervisor was rejected because it lacked specific description of job duties and did not establish full responsibility for any course taught.
Counsel's unsubstantiated assertions in the appellate brief that beneficiary did not work as a speech pathologist were rejected as not constituting evidence.
Director incorrectly relied on the beneficiary's 2019 TN-status admission regarding a different employer to discredit the petitioner's own experience letter, which was unrelated to that admission.
Director's use of the TN-status admission as a separate basis to deny the qualifying job offer was withdrawn by the AAO as not material.
Completed
I-140 filed
Assistant professor of speech-language pathology
Completed
Director — Denied
Initial decision: Denied.
Completed
Appeal to the AAO
Petitioner appealed to the Administrative Appeals Office for de novo review.
2025-03-27
AAO decision — Dismissed
The appeal was dismissed because the petitioner failed to submit a qualifying offer of employment predating the petition filing, and failed to demonstrate the beneficiary had three years of qualifying teaching or research experience.
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