MAY012026_02B5203Decided 2026-05-01I-140

A Brazilian business manager's EB-2 exceptional ability and national interest waiver petition was dismissed because…

Dismissed Useful for: avoid these mistakes
EB-2-NIWField: business managementOrigin: Brazil
The outcome

This appeal was not successful at this stage

The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding that although the petitioner met at least three of the six evidentiary criteria, she failed the final merits determination because the record did not establish a degree of expertise significantly above that ordinarily encountered in business management. Without qualifying for EB-2 exceptional ability, she was also ineligible for the national interest waiver.

In plain English

The petitioner, a business manager from Brazil, sought EB-2 immigrant classification as an individual of exceptional ability and a national interest waiver. Although SCOPS had found she met five evidentiary criteria, it denied the petition at the final merits stage. On appeal, the AAO agreed with SCOPS's ultimate conclusion, noting that meeting threshold criteria is not enough on its own. The AAO also reversed SCOPS's findings on two criteria — membership in a professional association and recognition for significant contributions — finding those were not actually met. Because the petitioner's education, licenses, and recommendation letters reflected ordinary qualifications rather than expertise significantly above the norm, she failed the final merits determination and was consequently ineligible for the national interest waiver.

What worked & what failed

What worked: The petitioner successfully demonstrated at least three of the six required evidentiary criteria, including a bachelor's degree in business administration, at least ten years of full-time experience, and a professional license, clearing the initial evidence threshold.

What failed: 1. Recommendation letters from colleagues and employers praised the petitioner's dedication and reliability but did not show her expertise was above that of an ordinary business manager. 2. The professional license and association membership were standard requirements for anyone practicing in her field in Brazil, not markers of exceptional ability. 3. The petitioner's degree and training certificates showed she met general educational qualifications without evidence that her knowledge or credentials stood above the norm in her field.

Takeaway: For an EB-2 exceptional ability petition, meeting the minimum evidentiary criteria is only the first step — petitioners must also provide comparative evidence (e.g., expert opinion, industry benchmarks, or recognition from outside their direct employers) showing their expertise is substantially above the ordinary level in their field. Generic praise in recommendation letters and standard professional credentials are unlikely to satisfy the final merits determination.

For RFE responses & petition building

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 successfully demonstrated at least three of the six required evidentiary criteria, including a bachelor's degree in business administration, at least ten years of full-time experience, and a professional license, clearing the initial evidence threshold.

Evidence that wasn't enough alone

  • Recommendation letters from colleagues and employers praised the petitioner's dedication and reliability but did not show her expertise was above that of an ordinary business manager
  • The professional license and association membership were standard requirements for anyone practicing in her field in Brazil, not markers of exceptional ability
  • The petitioner's degree and training certificates showed she met general educational qualifications without evidence that her knowledge or credentials stood above the norm in her field.
Find more EB-2-NIW cases with similar evidence patterns →
How the case moved

Completed

I-140 filed

Business manager

Completed

SCOPS — Denied

Initial decision: Denied.

Completed

Appeal to the AAO

Petitioner appealed to the Administrative Appeals Office for de novo review.

2026-05-01

AAO decision — Dismissed

The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding that although the petitioner met at least three of the six evidentiary criteria, she failed the final merits determination because the record did not establish a degree of expertise significantly above that ordinarily encountered in business management. Without qualifying for EB-2 exceptional ability, she was also ineligible for the national interest waiver.

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.

Authorities the office relied on
ChawatheThe petitioner bears the burden of proof to demonstrate eligibility by a preponderance of the evidence; assertions must be supported by relevant, probative, and credible evidence.
Christo'sThe AAO reviews questions of law and fact de novo.
DhanasarEstablishes the three-prong framework for adjudicating national interest waiver petitions.
KazarianEstablishes the two-step review process: first count the evidence against the required criteria, then conduct a final merits determination if the threshold is met.
FloresUSCIS's decision to grant or deny a national interest waiver is discretionary in nature.
BagamasbadAgencies are not required to make purely advisory findings on issues unnecessary to the ultimate decision.