dismissedAUG232023_02B52032023-08-23 · combined · Texas 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 banker, proposed broad activities in her field such as bringing foreign investment to the United States and providing financial planning advice, without identifying a specific endeavor.
Field: banking/finance · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“we determined that the Petitioner did not provide sufficient detail regarding her proposed endeavor to establish either its substantial merit or its national importance.”
“she did not describe a specific endeavor that could be evaluated under the first prong.”
“without sufficient details regarding the proposed endeavor, the record did not support a link between her work and these positive outcomes.”
AAO decision text
Prong 2 — well positionednot established · dispositive
“We further determined that the Petitioner did not establish that she is well-positioned to advance the proposed endeavor.”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- motion resubmission · discounted
“the Petitioner does not submit documentary evidence in support of the motion and does not state new facts to establish eligibility.”
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
- Record of success insufficient · p2 — a claimed track record the documents do not establish
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
Petitioner raised a Fourth Amendment claim alleging the Director's denial constituted an unreasonable search/seizure; AAO noted Petitioner failed to explain how the Fourth Amendment was implicated. Motion largely reasserted conclusory claims without addressing the AAO's prior appellate decision as required by regulation.
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 Coelho
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