NIW Bearings
dismissedAUG242021_05B52032021-08-24 · 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 legal analyst and consultant, proposed to help U.S. companies doing business in Latin America (and Latin American/Brazilian companies entering the U.S.) navigate tax, labor, contractual, and public law issues.

Field: legal/tax/business consulting (cross-border Latin America) · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“the record does not show that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor stands to sufficiently extend beyond his business and clientele to impact his field or the industry more broadly at a level commensurate with national importance”
“he has not submitted documentary evidence that would demonstrate that benefits to the regional or national economy resulting from the Petitioner's undertakings would reach the level of "substantial positive economic effects" contemplated by Dhanasar”
“The issue here is not the value of the legal industry or the impact of consulting on our country's economy, but rather whether the Petitioner's specific proposed endeavor... rises to the level of national importance”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

  • recommendation letter · discounted
    “he has not offered sufficient information and evidence to demonstrate that the prospective impact of his proposed endeavor rises to the level of national importance”
    AAO decision text
  • other · discounted
    “he has not submitted documentary evidence that would demonstrate that benefits to the regional or national economy... would reach the level of "substantial positive economic effects"”
    AAO decision text

Where this case turned

  • Economic claims unsupported · p1 — job/revenue projections with no corroborating basis
  • 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 explicitly distinguishes field-level importance (legal/consulting industry value) from endeavor-specific importance, citing Dhanasar's teaching-activity example as analogous. Decision states each stated reason is an independent and alternate basis for dismissal, though only prong 1 was actually analyzed.

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. 204.5(k)(2)
  • INA 203(b)(2)
  • Poursina v. USCIS

Cases in adjacent profiles

← Back to the case explorer