dismissedFEB022024_01B52032024-02-02 · 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 Petitioner proposed to offer behavioral and emotional support to youth in need through workshops run by her non-profit organization.
Field: social work / youth behavioral and emotional support · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“stands to sufficiently extend beyond her own company and the youth and families it seeks to help to impact the fields of pedagogy and social work or the U.S. economy more broadly at a level commensurate with national importance”
“the authors primarily focused on the importance of social work in general”
“the letters did not articulate how the Petitioner's specific proposed endeavor has national or global implications beyond those youth and families who will attend her workshops”
“this evidence did not concern her specific endeavor of organizing workshops in an attempt to socially engage young people”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- recommendation letter · discounted
“the authors primarily focused on the importance of social work in general”
AAO decision text - business plan · discounted
“had not shown that her proposed endeavor... stands to sufficiently extend beyond her own company”
AAO decision text - resume experience · ignored
“relates to the second prong of the Dhanasar framework”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“this evidence did not concern her specific endeavor of organizing workshops”
AAO decision text - motion resubmission · discounted
“The Petitioner has not demonstrated that our analysis was in error.”
AAO decision text
Where this case turned
- 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
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
The Petitioner attempted to analogize her case to Dhanasar's own facts (hypersonic propulsion researcher), which the AAO rejected as not analogous. The AAO also emphasized that the Petitioner's 30 years of professional experience relates to prong 2, not prong 1's national importance inquiry.
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
- Matter of Caron Int'l
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