Outcome: Dismissed
JUN182024_02B2203
Our summary
A lawyer with international trade expertise claimed extraordinary ability as a postsecondary teacher but provided no teaching experience or evidence of intent to teach in U.S. institutions. The AAO dismissed the appeal, holding that the petitioner failed to show by clear evidence an intent to continue work in the claimed area of expertise, making further analysis unnecessary.
Official PDF
Official PDF ↗Published by USCIS. The summary is ours, in our own words; the decision text is on uscis.gov.
No criterion in the table was found met in this decision.
What was missing
Every criterion in the table was found met.
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed; director rejected based on erroneous field of expertise finding. | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed; director rejected based on erroneous field of expertise finding. | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed; director rejected based on erroneous field of expertise finding. | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed; director rejected based on erroneous field of expertise finding. | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed; director rejected based on erroneous field of expertise finding. | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed; director rejected based on erroneous field of expertise finding. | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed; director rejected based on erroneous field of expertise finding. | |
| Not reached / not discussed | Not reached; failure to demonstrate intent to continue work in claimed postsecondary teaching field is dispositive. |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.
