NIW Bearings
dismissedAUG242023_10B52032023-08-24 · appeal · 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 proposed to work as an independent operational risk manager and consultant, helping U.S. companies develop and implement risk management plans to prevent financial crime and losses.

Field: operational risk management / financial crime prevention · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“the record does not establish how the endeavor would have broader implications in terms of significant potential to employ U.S. workers or have substantial positive economic effects, beyond the Petitioner's clients”
“Because the Petitioner omitted any reference to founding her own risk management company and working as its general manager at the time of filing, her assertions in response to the RFE regarding her new startup company present a new set of facts that purport to materially change the petition”
“none of these letters explain the nature of the impact of her achievements nor do they elaborate on how her risk management consulting services affected or influenced others in the field”
“the record does not show that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor, as initially described, stands to sufficiently extend beyond her clients to impact the risk management industry or the U.S. economy more broadly”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

  • business plan · discounted
    “her assertions in response to the RFE regarding her new startup company present a new set of facts that purport to materially change the petition and, thus, cannot establish eligibility”
    AAO decision text
  • recommendation letter · discounted
    “none of these letters explain the nature of the impact of her achievements nor do they elaborate on how her risk management consulting services affected or influenced others in the field”
    AAO decision text
  • citations publications · discounted
    “this evidence, however, does not concern her specific endeavor of providing operational risk management and consulting services to U.S. companies”
    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
  • Letters conclusory · p1 — letters praise skills in general terms without tracing specific impact
  • Local, not national scope · p1 — impact confined to clients / a region
  • Material change of endeavor · p1 — the endeavor described on appeal is not the one filed
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 treated the Petitioner's RFE-stage pivot to founding her own company (with a new business plan and job-creation projections) as an impermissible material change to the endeavor, refusing to consider that evidence at all; the appeal turned entirely on the originally-described independent consulting endeavor lacking national scope.

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. 103.2(b)(1)
  • 8 C.F.R. 103.3
  • Matter of Izummi
  • Matter of Katigbak
  • Matter of L-A-C-
  • Poursina v. USCIS

Cases in adjacent profiles

← Back to the case explorer