NIW Bearings
dismissedFEB052026_07B52032026-02-05 · appeal · SCOPS 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 proposes to modernize core operational systems of U.S. small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) by making advanced enterprise software, automation technologies, and augmented reality tools accessible and practical. He plans to deliver consulting, implementation, and maintenance services to improve SME efficiency, productivity, and competitiveness.

Field: enterprise software modernization, automation, augmented reality technology · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

EB-2 threshold — addressed

SCOPS found and AAO agreed that the Petitioner qualifies as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree via a foreign bachelor's equivalent in computer information systems plus at least five years of progressive experience in the specialty.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“the evidence here shows the services the Petitioner intends to provide to his direct clients, but it does not establish how his services will impact the field more broadly to have national or global implications.”
“the record does not provide evidentiary support for the stated financial projections to demonstrate how these numbers were calculated, details regarding the basis for these projections”
“the relevant question is not the importance of the field in which the individual will work; instead, we focus on the 'the specific endeavor that the [Petitioner] proposes to undertake'”
“the majority of the letters in the record focus on the Petitioner's skill set and the impact of the Petitioner's prior work and not the prospective impact of the proposed endeavor.”
“although the author of this letter concurs with the Petitioner's claims of broader implications, the record does not support the broader implications of the Petitioner's proposed endeavor.”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

  • degree · credited
  • resume experience · credited
  • business plan · discounted
    “the record does not provide evidentiary support for the stated financial projections to demonstrate how these numbers were calculated”
    AAO decision text
  • recommendation letter · discounted
    “the majority of the letters in the record focus on the Petitioner's skill set and the impact of the Petitioner's prior work and not the prospective impact of the proposed endeavor.”
    AAO decision text
  • other · discounted
    “this evidence supports the Petitioner's statements about the importance of SMEs and government initiatives to support them, it does not further the Petitioner's claim of his proposed endeavor's national importance.”
    AAO decision text

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
  • Field importance conflated with endeavor · p1 — argues the field matters, not the specific endeavor
  • Letters conclusory · p1 — letters praise skills in general terms without tracing specific impact
  • Local, not national scope · p1 — impact confined to clients / a region
1,312coded 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

The AAO split prong 1 by finding substantial merit but not national importance — an unusual partial credit outcome. The AAO explicitly acknowledged SCOPS failed to address the petitioner's STEM/AR arguments but still found against the petitioner on national importance. The AAO also noted in a footnote that a letter of intent from a technology consultancy was more relevant to prong 2 than prong 1, illustrating cross-prong evidence sorting. The petitioner's argument that SCOPS improperly focused on individual clients rather than the replicable framework was directly addressed and rejected.

What this case teaches

Analyst reading of the decision text.

Decisive factor

Record showed only client-specific consulting benefits and unsupported financial/job projections, not evidence of broader, field-wide or national-scale impact required for national importance.

Transferable lesson

Support national importance claims with concrete data on broader field/industry impact and substantiate economic projections, not just credential-focused endorsement letters.

Endeavor framing

moderate

National-importance theory

critical_emerging_tech · stem_positive_factor · economic_job_creation · economic_growth_generic · government_interest · us_competitiveness

Evidence targeting

person_focused

Cases in adjacent profiles

← Back to the case explorer