dismissedFEB252020_01B52032020-02-25 · 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 Beneficiary sought to continue working as a process engineer for his employer, designing and optimizing manufacturing processes and equipment layouts for the company's material processing operations.
Field: chemistry / process engineering (semiconductor manufacturing) · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“the evidence is not sufficient to demonstrate this endeavor's national importance”
“the relevant question is not the importance of the industry in which the individual will work or the past success of his employer”
“it has not demonstrated that the economic implications of these operations would be attributable to the Beneficiary's process engineering projects to an extent that his proposed work holds national importance”
“the Petitioner has not shown that the Beneficiary's proposed endeavor stands to sufficiently extend beyond his employer to impact the manufacturing industry more broadly”
AAO decision text
Prong 2 — well positionednot established · dispositive
“did not provide specific examples of how the Beneficiary's work has been implemented, utilized, or applauded by others in the field”
“The Petitioner does not, however, offer comparative statistics showing the significance of this level of citation within the Beneficiary's field”
“the Petitioner has not demonstrated that the Beneficiary's performance review represents a record of success in the process engineering field”
“not every individual who has performed original graduate research will be found to be well positioned to advance his proposed endeavor”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- recommendation letter · discounted
“did not provide specific examples of how the Beneficiary's work has been implemented, utilized, or applauded by others in the field”
AAO decision text - citations publications · discounted
“does not, however, offer comparative statistics showing the significance of this level of citation within the Beneficiary's field”
AAO decision text - resume experience · discounted
“has not demonstrated that the Beneficiary's performance review represents a record of success in the process engineering field”
AAO decision text - awards · discounted
“the aforementioned employee awards post-date the filing of the petition”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“it has not demonstrated that the economic implications of these operations would be attributable to the Beneficiary's process engineering projects”
AAO decision text
Where this case turned
- Economic claims unsupported · p1 — job/revenue projections with no corroborating basis
- Employer-specific benefit · p1 — "work furthers my company's product" — value accrues to one firm
- Endeavor too vague · p1 — described as a job role, not a defined undertaking
- Local, not national scope · p1 — impact confined to clients / a region
- Citations insufficient · p2 — citation counts without qualitative account of impact
- Education alone insufficient · p2 — degrees offered as positioning — credentials are not a track record
- Letters conclusory · p2 — letters praise skills in general terms without tracing specific impact
- Record of success insufficient · p2 — a claimed track record the documents do not establish
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
AAO explicitly states each prong failure is an 'independent and alternate basis' for dismissal, and separately notes that a labor shortage argument alone does not satisfy the third prong balancing test (though third prong was not reached).
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)
- Poursina v. USCIS
Cases in adjacent profiles
- The Petitioner, a mechanical engineer, proposed to advance thermal management solutions for high-power, compact, and rel
- The Petitioner, a senior engineering program manager specializing in electromechanical systems, proposed to advance moto
- The Petitioner proposed to provide innovative solutions to optimize freight and vessel operations in the U.S. shipping i
- The Petitioner, a sales manager, proposed an endeavor in the United States for which he sought an EB-2 national interest
- The Petitioner proposed to lead a nationwide initiative to develop and implement a standardized materials management mod