NIW Bearings
dismissedAPR242025_02B52032025-04-24 · 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, employed as a Research & Development Project Manager at a Minnesota construction company, proposed to use machine learning algorithms to enhance concrete strength using wastewater byproducts.

Field: civil engineering / concrete materials research · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

EB-2 threshold — addressed

SCOPS and AAO agreed the Petitioner qualifies as an advanced degree professional based on his master of engineering degree.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“it ha[d] not been established that the petitioner's endeavor stands to sufficiently extend beyond his proposed employer”
“Benefits to a specific employer alone, even an employer with a national footprint, are not sufficiently relevant to the question of whether a petitioner's endeavor is of national importance.”
“nothing in the record supports how the Petitioner's endeavor will impact the creation of jobs for U.S. workers”
“the relevant question is not the importance of the industry or profession in which the individual will work”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

  • recommendation letter · discounted
    “Much of the letter from B-R- focuses on the Petitioner's experience, skills, and knowledge, which are considerations under Dhanasar's second prong.”
    AAO decision text
  • citations publications · discounted
    “he has not shown how the paper will result in broader implications for his endeavor”
    AAO decision text
  • resume experience · discounted
    “the Petitioner's experience and prior record of success go to Dhanasar's second prong which shifts the focus from the proposed endeavor to the individual”
    AAO decision text
  • business plan · discounted
    “The record does not contain any individual business plan that would suggest the Petitioner himself will hire workers.”
    AAO decision text
  • degree · credited

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
2,501coded 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 →

Notable

AAO cites a very recent USCIS Policy Alert (PA-2025-03, Jan. 15, 2025) on national importance factors, reflecting updated sub-regulatory guidance shortly before this decision. AAO also explicitly reserves prongs 2 and 3 as unnecessary once prong 1 fails, citing Bagamasbad and Matter of L-A-C- for the proposition that agencies need not reach unnecessary issues.

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
  • 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