NIW Bearings
dismissedDEC222023_01B52032023-12-22 · 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, an economist with a PhD in economics and finance, proposed to conduct economic research on infrastructure, financial institutions, and economic growth/policy, and separately (introduced later) to found and operate a financial/economic consulting firm that would employ economists, analysts, and other professionals.

Field: economics/finance · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

EB-2 threshold — addressed

The Petitioner qualifies as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree; only the national interest waiver eligibility was disputed.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“the lack of a consistent, specific proposed endeavor prevents a conclusion that the Petitioner has established national importance”
“the business plan does not explain how the proposed company would have a significant impact beyond its employees and customers”
“she did not indicate the extent to which her proposed endeavor would affect the entire U.S. economy”

AAO decision text

Prong 2 — well positionednot established · dispositive

“The Petitioner has likewise not documented any progress towards achieving the proposed endeavor as it relates to the business plan”
“the business plan presumes first-year assets of over $175,000, but the record does not say where these funds will come from”
“The letters do not establish the reception or impact of her past research work beyond”
“the Petitioner has not established that she is well-positioned to operate the business described in the business plan”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

  • business plan · discounted
    “the business plan does not explain how the proposed company would have a significant impact beyond its employees and customers”
    AAO decision text
  • recommendation letter · discounted
    “The letters do not establish the reception or impact of her past research work beyond”
    AAO decision text
  • resume experience · discounted
    “the letter describes the Petitioner's work as a market researcher, which is not the occupation described in the proposed endeavor”
    AAO decision text
  • citations publications · discounted
    “the only documented output from the Petitioner's research is a paper accepted for publication in January 2022, two months before she filed the petition”
    AAO decision text
  • degree · credited

Where this case turned

  • Business plan speculative · p1 — projections without a documented basis or steps
  • Economic claims unsupported · p1 — job/revenue projections with no corroborating basis
  • Endeavor too vague · p1 — described as a job role, not a defined undertaking
  • Business plan speculative · p2 — projections without a documented basis or steps
  • Funding absent · p2 — no documented funding or resources behind the plan
  • 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
1,358coded 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

The Petitioner presented two inconsistent proposed endeavors (academic economic research vs. founding a financial/economic consulting firm), and the AAO found the RFE-submitted business plan constituted a material change from the initial filing rather than a clarification, citing Izummi and Katigbak. The Petitioner's argument that her STEM PhD should be an 'especially positive factor' under USCIS Policy Manual F.5(D)(2) was acknowledged but found insufficient standing alone. Third prong was expressly reserved as unnecessary given the disposition of prongs one and two.

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-
  • USCIS Policy Manual F.5(D)(2)

Cases in adjacent profiles