NIW Bearings
dismissedFEB132025_08B52032025-02-13 · combined · 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, an entrepreneur, proposed to provide health consulting services in the area of patient blood management, tied to a business plan addressing blood product shortages in the U.S.

Field: health/patient blood management consulting · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“in determining national importance, the relevant question is not the importance of the industry or profession in which the individual will work; instead, we focus on "the specific endeavor that the foreign national proposes to undertake."”
“we assessed the Petitioner's health consulting in our prior decision and determined he had not demonstrated his proposed endeavor would impact his field or have substantial positive economic effects at a level of national importance.”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

  • motion resubmission · discounted
    “no such letter was filed with the motion nor was one included in the record below”
    AAO decision text
  • recommendation letter · discounted
    “no such letter was filed with the motion nor was one included in the record below”
    AAO decision text
  • business plan · discounted
    “the relevant question is not the importance of the industry or profession in which the individual will work”
    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
2,589coded 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

This is a combined motion decision following a prior AAO dismissal; only prong 1 (national importance) was addressed, as the AAO found the Petitioner failed to present new facts or legal error, dismissing without reaching prongs 2 or 3. The Petitioner's claim of a supporting SBA letter was unsupported by any actual filing.

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(a)(1)(i)
  • 8 C.F.R. 103.5(a)(1)(ii)
  • 8 C.F.R. 103.5(a)(2)
  • 8 C.F.R. 103.5(a)(3)
  • 8 C.F.R. 103.5(a)(4)

Cases in adjacent profiles

← Back to the case explorer