All Cases

The beneficiary proposes to work as a bankruptcy lawyer for individual clients, providing pro bono representation and publishing a 'Letter Series' to offer insights to debtors. The initial petition did not include policy and legislative work or public advocacy, which were later introduced in an RFE response but not considered.

The petitioner proposes to establish a consulting firm in the United States to advise U.S.-based businesses interested in entering the Brazilian market. The firm will focus on providing advice on Brazilian law to businesses and individuals involved in trading and direct foreign investment projects.

The motion to reconsider was dismissed because it was filed 58 calendar days after the decision, exceeding the 30-day regulatory limit (plus 3 days for mail). The AAO found no legal or policy basis to excuse the late filing, stating that regulations do not provide for exceptions to the 30-day requirement for motions to reconsider, and the AAO lacks authority to apply equitable tolling or waive regulatory requirements.

The petitioner proposes to work as a managing partner of her consulting firm, advising U.S. companies seeking to enter the Brazilian market on legal requirements, financial planning, and cross-border business expansion.

The petitioner proposes to establish a consulting company specializing in Brazilian tax and customs law, offering expertise in customs regulation, tax issues, and international trade rules. The endeavor aims to generate skilled jobs and stimulate economic growth.

The petitioner proposes to collaborate with other legal professionals to address legal issues for the Brazilian and American population as a legal professional specialist or serve as a legal policy consultant. This work would involve areas such as tax reform legislation, intellectual property protection for technology companies, commercial law, public administration and prison system, and alternative dispute resolution.

The petitioner intends to establish a legal consulting company in the United States, focusing on global tax, labor, and corporate law, as well as military science. This endeavor aims to provide specialized legal consulting services.

The appeal was dismissed because the Petitioner failed to establish eligibility for the underlying EB-2 classification. For advanced degree professional, the Petitioner's master's degree was awarded after the filing date, and she did not demonstrate five years of progressive post-baccalaureate experience at the time of filing. For exceptional ability, the Petitioner only met one of the six regulatory criteria (having a degree). She failed to provide sufficient evidence for professional association memberships (NALA/NFPA did not require a bachelor's degree, AILA membership was 'student' and 'ineligible', and no evidence for ABA). She also failed to demonstrate recognition for significant contributions to the broader legal industry or field, as her letters of recommendation were highly complimentary but did not detail such contributions.

The petitioner intends to register and establish a legal practice and/or partnership in the United States.

The petitioner's company would assist immigrants, primarily Spanish speakers, with filling out immigration forms, explaining questions, translating if necessary, and verifying applicant confidence. The company also plans to hire individuals to review forms and establish alliances with non-profit organizations, insurance companies, tax companies, and immigration lawyers.