The Petitioner, a youth outreach minister, proposed to reorganize and lead youth ministry programs and outreach activities for immigrant and youth communities, aiming to counter radicalization and substance abuse and promote healthy lifestyle choices.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“the Petitioner must demonstrate the national importance of her providing specific youth outreach ministerial services rather than the national importance of youth outreach, youth ministerial services, or other social or religious industries”

“the evidence does not show that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor of providing youth outreach services stands to sufficiently extend beyond [] to impact the field or the U.S. economy more broadly at a level commensurate with national importance”

“the Petitioner has not established that the specific endeavor she proposes to undertake has significant potential to employ U.S. workers or otherwise offers substantial positive economic effects”

“Without sufficient information or evidence regarding any projected U.S. economic impact or job creation attributable to her future work”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

• other · discounted

  “we will not consider this evidence for the first time on appeal as it was not presented before the Director”

  AAO decision text
• recommendation letter · discounted

  “we will not consider this evidence for the first time on appeal as it was not presented before the Director”

  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
• 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

Notable

The Petitioner's proposed endeavor shifted significantly between filing, RFE response, and appeal (from generic youth ministry reorganization to countering Islamic radicalization and opioid abuse among immigrant youth); AAO declined to consider new evidence submitted for first time on appeal under Matter of Soriano/Obaigbena. Only prong 1 was reached; AAO explicitly stated its finding on national importance was an independent and alternate basis for dismissal.

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.

• INA 203(b)(2)
• INA 291

Cases in adjacent profiles

• The Petitioner, an aircraft mechanic and instructor, proposed to enhance aviation maintenance training programs, support
• The Petitioner seeks EB-2 classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree with a national inter
• The petitioner sought an EB-2 national interest waiver of the job offer requirement, but the substance of the proposed e
• The Beneficiary, sponsored by a private airline, sought EB-2 classification as an individual of exceptional ability in a
• The petitioner sought an EB-2 national interest waiver as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree; the sp