dismissedDEC132021_01B52032021-12-13 · combined · 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, an historical architect, proposed work related to Islamic/Persian architecture, including consulting on the design of an Islamic cultural center, lecturing, and teaching classes on historic architectural forms.
Field: historical architecture · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“the Petitioner has not sufficiently demonstrated the national importance of her proposed endeavor under the first prong”
“The information and evidence provided doesnotsuggest that the Petitioner's activities in this regard would have broader implications in the field or extend beyond the individuals who attend her lectures”
“the Petitioner has not explained how the benefits of the cultural center would be so substantial as to rise to the level of national importance”
“these future activities do not assist the Petitioner in establishing eligibility at the time of filing”
“the article does not establish that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor would have broader implications in the field or enrich societal culture”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- recommendation letter · discounted
“praises the Petitioner's personal and professional qualifications but does not demonstrate knowledge of the proposed endeavor”
AAO decision text - motion resubmission · discounted
“Reasserting previously stated facts or resubmitting previously provided evidence does not constitute "new facts."”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“the articles do not discuss the specific cultural center the Petitioner proposes to consult on, nor do they discuss the Petitioner's role”
AAO decision text - business plan · discounted
“these future activities do not assist the Petitioner in establishing eligibility at the time of filing”
AAO decision text
Where this case turned
- Business plan speculative · p1 — projections without a documented basis or steps
- Endeavor too vague · p1 — described as a job role, not a defined undertaking
- Local, not national scope · p1 — impact confined to clients / a region
1,312coded 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
Second combined motion to reopen/reconsider following a prior dismissed appeal and a prior dismissed combined motion; AAO applies 'eligibility at time of filing' doctrine extensively to reject post-filing speaking engagements, teaching offers, and a speculative cultural-center consulting role as evidence of national importance.
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. 103.5
- Matter of Izummi
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