dismissedAPR272023_03B52032023-04-27 · appeal · Nebraska 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, a software QA engineer, initially proposed to obtain certain testing certifications and become an instructor and senior QA engineer, later attempting to expand this via a five-year plan (Scrum Master, project manager, MBA, senior director) submitted only in response to the RFE.
Field: computer software quality assurance engineering · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“The record does not establish that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor of obtaining certain certifications and becoming an instructor... has both substantial merit and national importance”
“The Petitioner's work-either as a QA engineer or as an instructor-appears to benefit her employers and clients.”
“the Petitioner does not establish in the record the types of jobs she believes her endeavor will create, either directly or indirectly”
“the record does not establish how her cultural knowledge will have "national or even global implications within a particular field"... rather than merely benefitting her employer and its clients for particular projects”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- other · discounted
“A visa petition may not be approved based on speculation of future eligibility or after a petitioner becomes eligible under a new set of facts.”
AAO decision text - certification membership · discounted
“does not indicate how the proposed endeavor has substantial merit”
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
- 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
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 rejected the Petitioner's expanded five-year professional plan (Scrum Master, MBA, senior director) submitted for the first time in RFE response as an impermissible 'material change' / new set of facts under Matter of Katigbak and Matter of Izummi, evaluating national importance only against the narrower endeavor described at filing.
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. 103.2(b)(1)
- 8 C.F.R. 103.2(b)(12)
- 8 C.F.R. 103.2(b)(8)
- 8 C.F.R. 103.3
- Matter of Izummi
- Matter of Katigbak
- Matter of L-A-C-
Cases in adjacent profiles
- The Petitioner, a mechanical engineer, proposed to advance thermal management solutions for high-power, compact, and rel
- The Petitioner, a senior engineering program manager specializing in electromechanical systems, proposed to advance moto
- The Petitioner proposed to provide innovative solutions to optimize freight and vessel operations in the U.S. shipping i
- The Petitioner, a sales manager, proposed an endeavor in the United States for which he sought an EB-2 national interest
- The Petitioner proposed to lead a nationwide initiative to develop and implement a standardized materials management mod