NIW Bearings
dismissedAPR222025_02B52032025-04-22 · appeal

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 proposed to serve as CEO of a Florida-based company providing logistics and export consulting services to small and medium-sized enterprises, including helping them optimize operations, reduce costs, and expand trade with Brazil and Latin America.

Field: logistics management consulting · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

EB-2 threshold — addressed

SCOPS and AAO agreed Petitioner qualified for EB-2 classification as an advanced degree professional.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“The Petitioner cites no evidence to support these claims.”
“The record also does not establish that the Petitioner's work would extend beyond her company and its clients to impact her field more broadly at a level indicative of national importance.”
“None of these articles address the Petitioner's proposed endeavor.”
“Our assessment of national importance does not focus on the importance of a field, occupation or related issues in general, but instead "focuses on the specific endeavor that the foreign national proposes to undertake."”
“These projections do not demonstrate that the Petitioner's company has significant potential to employ U.S. workers given that... the warehousing sector and related industries employ over 13.3 million people.”
“V-L- does not demonstrate, however, that any of these services are novel, unique or otherwise have national or global implications in the Petitioner's field.”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

  • business plan · discounted
    “These projections do not demonstrate that the Petitioner's company has significant potential to employ U.S. workers”
    AAO decision text
  • media · discounted
    “None of these articles address the Petitioner's proposed endeavor.”
    AAO decision text
  • recommendation letter · discounted
    “does not demonstrate... that any of these services are novel, unique or otherwise have national or global implications”
    AAO decision text
  • resume experience · ignored
    “attests to her prior achievements and skills, but does not address her specific 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
  • Occupational shortage argument rejected · p1 — argues a labor shortage — the labor-certification question, not Dhanasar
2,501coded 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 →

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
  • Flores v. Garland

What this case teaches

Analyst reading of the decision text.

Decisive factor

Every national-importance claim was uncited; a pile of industry articles never mentioned her endeavor, and tiny projections measured against a $1.64 trillion industry showed no broader implications; prong one failed.

Transferable lesson

Volume of industry articles is not evidence about your endeavor; cite support for each impact claim and expect projections to be weighed against the industry's full scale.

Endeavor framing

moderate

National-importance theory

economic_growth_generic · us_competitiveness · economic_job_creation

Evidence targeting

person_focused

Cases in adjacent profiles

← Back to the case explorer