NIW Bearings
dismissedDEC202024_06B52032024-12-20 · 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, a cartography manager, proposed to develop a local-scale geostatistical information system (GIS) and provide related consulting, advisory, and instructional services to support public-policy decision-making.

Field: cartography / GIS · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“the Petitioner does not explain how the proposed endeavor would expand to provide services to these prospective clients”
“Merely working in an important field or profession is insufficient to establish the national importance of the proposed endeavor.”
“the shortage of professionals alone does not render the Petitioner's proposed endeavor nationally important under the Dhanasar framework.”
“the Petitioner has not offered evidence sufficient to explain or otherwise demonstrate the proposed endeavor's importance to U.S. competitiveness and national security”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

  • business plan · discounted
    “the Petitioner does not explain how the proposed endeavor would expand to provide services to these prospective clients nor is it apparent from the business plan.”
    AAO decision text
  • other · discounted
    “the record lacks evidence showing that the government has a particular interest in the Petitioner's proposed endeavor.”
    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
  • Occupational shortage argument rejected · p1 — argues a labor shortage — the labor-certification question, not Dhanasar
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 argued national importance based on alignment with White House FY2023 R&D priorities, STEM workforce inclusivity initiatives, and a critical/emerging technologies list (advanced computing); AAO rejected each as conflating field importance with the specific endeavor and as unsupported by evidence of government interest in this particular endeavor.

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.

  • Flores v. Garland

Cases in adjacent profiles

← Back to the case explorer