dismissedFEB262025_07B52032025-02-26 · 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, a senior software engineer, proposed to use advanced computing architecture and human-machine interface principles to expand and enhance UI/UX features supporting a company's cloud-gaming and streaming infrastructure and services.
Field: software engineering / cloud-gaming UI/UX and cybersecurity · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“the record does not include adequate corroborating evidence, to show that the Beneficiary's specific proposed endeavor offers broader implications in the digital entertainment and gaming field”
“the Petitioner has not sufficiently explained or demonstrated how the Beneficiary's employment would independently lead to economic growth or job creation nationwide”
“the Petitioner has not demonstrated that the Beneficiary's proposed endeavor of working as a senior software engineer will have a significant impact beyond the company itself”
“the Petitioner cannot rely on its market share alone to claim the Beneficiary's work is nationally important”
“merely working in an important field is insufficient to establish the national importance of the proposed endeavor”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- recommendation letter · discounted
- other · discounted
“the record does not include adequate corroborating evidence”
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
- 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
The Director had found substantial merit and prong 2 satisfied; AAO agreed on substantial merit but dismissed solely on national importance (prong 1), reserving prongs 2 and 3.
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. 103.3
- Matter of L-A-C-
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