EB-2 NIW Appeals: Finance & Accounting
Last updated 2026-09-02
The AAO dismissed 91.8% of EB-2 NIW appeals from Finance & Accounting petitioners in published non-precedent decisions from 2017–2025 (n=292). The criterion most often at issue was Prong 1: Substantial merit and national importance.
Outcomes by Year
| Year | Dismissed | Sustained | Remanded | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | 14 (—) | 0 | 0 | 14 |
| 2024 | 140 (93.3%) | 1 | 9 | 150 |
| 2023 | 72 (88.9%) | 1 | 8 | 81 |
| 2022 | 11 (—) | 0 | 4 | 15 |
| 2021 | 20 (95.2%) | 0 | 1 | 21 |
| 2020 | 6 (—) | 0 | 0 | 6 |
| 2019 | 2 (—) | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| 2018 | 2 (—) | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| 2017 | 1 (—) | 0 | 0 | 1 |
Criteria Breakdown
| Criterion | In Dismissed | In Sustained | Total | Dismissal Rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Prong 1: Substantial merit and national importance | 300 | 2 | 325 | 92.3% |
| Prong 2: Well positioned to advance the endeavor | 199 | 2 | 218 | 91.3% |
| Prong 3: On balance, waiver benefits the U.S. | 180 | 1 | 197 | 91.4% |
| Exceptional ability | 84 | 0 | 96 | 87.5% |
| Advanced degree | 64 | 0 | 78 | 82.1% |
| Motion to reopen/reconsider | 40 | 0 | 44 | 90.9% |
Example Decisions
Sustained2024-10-16The appeal was sustained because the AAO disagreed with the Director's conclusion that the petitioner was not well-posit
Sustained2023-03-22The appeal was sustained because the AAO found the Director erred by narrowly focusing on only a part of the Petitioner'
Dismissed2025-03-06The AAO found that the petitioner qualified for the underlying EB-2 classification as an individual of exceptional abili
Dismissed2025-02-20The motion to reconsider was dismissed because the petitioner failed to establish that the prior decision was based on a
Dismissed2024-12-19The motion to reconsider was dismissed because the petitioner failed to show that the prior decision was based on an inc
Dismissed2024-12-03The appeal was dismissed because the petitioner failed to establish the 'national importance' prong of the Dhanasar fram
Dismissed2024-12-04Although the AAO found that the petitioner did qualify for the underlying EB-2 classification based on her degree and fi
In sustained EB-2 NIW appeals for Finance & Accounting petitioners, the AAO credited evidence such as a track record showing the petitioner is positioned to advance the endeavor; evidence that the proposed endeavor has national importance. Dismissed cases most often lacked a clearly defined proposed endeavor with specificity beyond a general field of work; non-speculative evidence (claims were conclusory or unsupported); evidence that benefits extend beyond the petitioner's own work or employer.
NYSDOT-era decisions (pre-2017)
Outcomes by Year
| Year | Dismissed | Sustained | Remanded | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2014 | 1 (—) | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 2013 | 1 (—) | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 2012 | 2 (—) | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| 2011 | 2 (—) | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| 2010 | 1 (—) | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 2009 | 1 (—) | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 2008 | 1 (—) | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 2007 | 3 (—) | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| 2006 | 2 (—) | 1 | 0 | 3 |
| 2005 | 5 (—) | 0 | 1 | 6 |
Criteria Discussed
| Criterion | In Dismissed | In Sustained | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intrinsic merit (NYSDOT) | 17 | 1 | 19 |
| National in scope (NYSDOT) | 17 | 1 | 19 |
| Substantially greater degree than U.S. worker (NYSDOT) | 17 | 1 | 18 |
| Advanced degree | 3 | 0 | 4 |
| Exceptional ability | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| Procedural/filing | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Fraud/misrepresentation | 1 | 0 | 1 |
Sample: published AAO non-precedent decisions collected from uscis.gov. EB-2 NIW statistics reflect the Dhanasar framework era (2017–2025); the prior NYSDOT framework applied different legal standards. These are appeals, not all USCIS adjudications; approval rates here are not initial-filing approval rates. Read our full methodology.
Get Your Free Strategy Preview →