NIW Bearings
dismissedAPR022025_10B52032025-04-02 · appeal · Texas Service Center

This is an AAO appeal decision — a case denied once and appealed. It shows how the framework is applied; it is not the filing population.

The Petitioner intended to serve as CEO of her own Florida-based company providing consulting on real estate, mortgage financing, market research, and financial/business advisory services, particularly to low-income populations.

Field: real estate legal advisory/consulting · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

EB-2 threshold — not met

The Petitioner claimed a foreign equivalent bachelor's degree plus five years of progressive experience to equal an advanced degree, but the experience letters lacked specific duty descriptions as required by 8 C.F.R. 204.5(g)(1), and she failed to show the experience was related to her proposed CEO endeavor.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“the Director was not asking the Petitioner to prove her projections, but rather properly concluded she had not demonstrated the economic significance of the projected data”
“The submitted projections, without supporting evidence providing any basis for the projections or the economic significance of the projections, do not meet the preponderance of the evidence standard.”
“the Petitioner did not identify in the record below or now on appeal the innovative solutions she intends to implement or explain how these measures would have global or national implications”
“merely working in an important field or in an area a government entity has described as a priority is sufficient to establish the national importance of the proposed endeavor”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

  • business plan · discounted
    “did not demonstrate the economic significance of the projected data contained in her business plan”
    AAO decision text
  • recommendation letter · discounted
    “neither the Petitioner in her briefs or business plan nor the author of the expert letter supported their assertions... with corroborating details or evidence”
    AAO decision text
  • resume experience · discounted
    “the letters submitted to demonstrate her experience do not contain a specific description of the duties she performed”
    AAO decision text

Where this case turned

  • Business plan speculative · p1 — projections without a documented basis or steps
  • Economic claims unsupported · p1 — job/revenue projections with no corroborating basis
  • Field importance conflated with endeavor · p1 — argues the field matters, not the specific endeavor
1,358coded decisions carry the failure named in this record. A placement shows where your profile sits among them, not what it predicts.See where your profile sits — 90 seconds →

Notable

AAO withdrew the Director's favorable finding on the underlying EB-2 advanced-degree classification (reversing a point the Petitioner had already won below), then separately found prong one dispositive on national importance, reserving prongs two and three under Bagamasbad/L-A-C- doctrine.

Authorities this decision leans on

From the doctrinal survivor set — 187 authority tests across 47 distinct authorities cleared the differential-lift gates. Only those appear here.

  • 8 C.F.R. 204.5(g)(1)
  • 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(2)
  • Flores v. Garland
  • Matter of L-A-C-

Cases in adjacent profiles

← Back to the case explorer