NIW Bearings
dismissedAPR192024_06B52032024-04-19 · 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 sought to launch and operate a Florida-based company offering sales training and a digital learning platform for pharmaceutical sales professionals, and to provide consulting/sales-restructuring services to U.S. trade companies.

Field: pharmaceutical sales training/digital learning platform · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“the relevant question is not the overall importance of the industry in which the individual will work or the value of immigrant entrepreneurship”
“We are not persuaded by the argument that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor has national importance due to the shortage of workers in his field.”
“the record does not demonstrate that it stands to impact his field or industry more broadly beyond the clientele enrolled in his company's sales training programs”
“It is insufficient to claim an endeavor has national importance or would create a broad impact without providing evidence to substantiate such claims.”
“he has not shown that his proposed endeavor stands to sufficiently extend beyond his company and its clientele to impact his field”
“he did not elaborate on these projections or provide evidence supporting the need for these additional employees”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

  • business plan · discounted
    “these projections are not supported by details showing their basis or an explanation of how they will be achieved”
    AAO decision text
  • recommendation letter · discounted
    “relate to the second prong of the Dhanasar framework”
    AAO decision text
  • other · discounted
    “does not demonstrate how the Petitioner's day-to-day management...rise to a level of national importance”
    AAO decision text
  • other · discounted
    “he has not demonstrated how operating a sales training and support services company...rises to a level of national importance”
    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
  • Endeavor too vague · p1 — described as a job role, not a defined undertaking
  • 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
  • Occupational shortage argument rejected · p1 — argues a labor shortage — the labor-certification question, not Dhanasar
1,312coded 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 explicitly distinguishes generic industry/field importance (immigrant entrepreneurship value) from the specific endeavor's importance, and cites Dhanasar's own teaching-activity example as analogous; also notes labor shortages are properly addressed via labor certification, not NIW.

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.

  • Flores v. Garland
  • Matter of L-A-C-

Cases in adjacent profiles

← Back to the case explorer