The Petitioner, a human resources director, proposed an endeavor related to her field of human resources, supported by a business plan and expert opinion letter, though the specific nature of the endeavor is not detailed in this motion decision.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“we concluded the Petitioner did not show how her endeavor would have broader implications in the field or would have significant potential to employ U.S. workers or other substantial positive economic effects”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

• business plan · discounted

  “we also explained why the evidence she claims we did not consider did not satisfy the national importance aspect of the first prong”

  AAO decision text
• recommendation letter · discounted

  “we also explained why the evidence she claims we did not consider did not satisfy the national importance aspect of the first prong”

  AAO decision text
• motion resubmission · discounted

  “simply disagreeing with our conclusions, without showing how we misapplied law or pointing to policy that contradicts our analysis of the evidence, is not sufficient to reconsider our decision”

  AAO decision text

Where this case turned

• Economic claims unsupported · p1 — job/revenue projections with no corroborating basis
• Endeavor too vague · p1 — described as a job role, not a defined undertaking

Notable

This is a motion to reconsider following a prior AAO appellate dismissal; the AAO's review is procedurally limited to whether the prior decision misapplied law or policy, not a fresh merits review. The AAO found the Petitioner merely reargued the same evidence without identifying legal error, citing Matter of O-S-G- for the principle that a motion to reconsider cannot simply resubmit the same brief.

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. 103.5
• Matter of O-S-G-

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