NIW Bearings
dismissedAPR052024_03B52032024-04-05 · 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, chief economist for a Florida fintech company (a regional office of a Brazilian business he co-founded), sought to lead U.S. expansion of foreign exchange technology services to small and medium enterprises.

Field: international financial markets / foreign exchange fintech · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“the focus of this prong is the national importance of the proposed endeavor, not its geographic area”
“he has not offered sufficient evidence demonstrating that the benefit to individual businesses rises to the level of national importance”
“The record does not indicate that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor involves HUBZone-certified companies or has any association to federal contracts.”
“merely working in an important field is insufficient to establish the national importance of the proposed endeavor”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

  • business plan · discounted
    “the record is insufficient to show that the technology has impacted the field nationally”
    AAO decision text
  • recommendation letter · discounted
    “he has not offered sufficient evidence demonstrating that the benefit to individual businesses rises to the level of national importance”
    AAO decision text
  • resume experience · discounted
  • other · discounted
    “has not shown that the program confirms the national impact of his proposed endeavor”
    AAO decision text

Where this case turned

  • Economic claims unsupported · p1 — job/revenue projections with no corroborating basis
  • Employer-specific benefit · p1 — "work furthers my company's product" — value accrues to one firm
  • Field importance conflated with endeavor · p1 — argues the field matters, not the specific endeavor
  • Local, not national scope · p1 — impact confined to clients / a region
2,589coded 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 cites circuit court authority (Poursina v. USCIS, Flores v. Garland) affirming the discretionary nature of NIW decisions; Petitioner's SBA HUBZone program argument was rejected because he failed to show his endeavor involved HUBZone-certified companies or federal contracts.

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. 103.3
  • Matter of L-A-C-

Cases in adjacent profiles

← Back to the case explorer