dismissedAUG242023_04B52032023-08-24 · motion_reconsider · 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 decision does not specify the substantive occupation or plan; the Petitioner's proposed endeavor and its details are not described beyond references to education and prior employer experience.

Read the decision (uscis.gov)

Prong 1 — national importancenot established

“the relevant question is not the importance of the field, industry, or profession in which the individual will work; instead, we focus on "the specific endeavor that the foreign national proposes to undertake."”

“The Petitioner does not state adequate reasons for reconsidering our conclusion that the their proposed endeavor does not rise to a level of national importance.”

AAO decision text

Prong 2 — well positionednot established

“simply having education, skills, and/or knowledge in isolation does not place a petitioner in a position to advance their proposed endeavor.”

“the record does not reflect how the Petitioner's prior performance of the duties described in the experience letters is either a similar effort as that of their proposed endeavor or how it constitutes a record of success.”

“The record simply does not indicate any progress to achieving the proposed endeavor.”

“the recommendation letters the Petitioner submitted are not material, relevant, or probative evidence in the record of interest or support in the endeavor the Petitioner proposed in their petition.”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

recommendation letter · discounted
“the recommendation letters the Petitioner submitted are not material, relevant, or probative evidence in the record of interest or support in the endeavor”
AAO decision text
resume experience · discounted
“the record does not reflect how the Petitioner's prior performance of the duties described in the experience letters... constitutes a record of success”
AAO decision text
degree · discounted
“simply having education, skills, and/or knowledge in isolation does not place a petitioner in a position to advance their proposed endeavor.”
AAO decision text
motion resubmission · discounted
“The Petitioner's brief simply repeats and restates the arguments and documents they aver support the national importance of their endeavor that were introduced earlier in these proceedings.”
AAO decision text

Where this case turned

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
Education alone insufficient · p2 — degrees offered as positioning — credentials are not a track record
Letters conclusory · p2 — letters praise skills in general terms without tracing specific impact
Letters not independent · p2 — letters come from employers and close collaborators, not independent experts
No progress evidence · p2 — no documented movement toward the endeavor since filing
Record of success insufficient · p2 — a claimed track record the documents do not establish

1,581coded 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

This is a motion to reconsider following a prior dismissed appeal; the AAO addresses both prong 1 (national importance) and prong 2 (well positioned) substantively despite the narrow procedural posture, finding the Petitioner failed to identify any legal or policy error and merely restated prior arguments without new legal authority.

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(a)(1)(i)
8 C.F.R. 103.5(a)(1)(ii)
8 C.F.R. 103.5(a)(3)
8 C.F.R. 103.5(a)(4)
Matter of O-S-G-

Cases in adjacent profiles

← Back to the case explorer