NIW Bearings
dismissedJAN102024_08B52032024-01-10 · appeal · 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 accountant, proposed to provide accounting services including financial reconciliation, budget/inventory/audit support, tax compliance, and cross-border transaction assistance, without committing to a single employer.

Field: accounting · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

EB-2 threshold — addressed

AAO found on de novo review that Petitioner established eligibility as advanced degree professional (bachelor's equivalent plus 5+ years progressive experience), reversing the Director's silence on this issue.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“Here, the Petitioner leaves the proposed endeavor open to interpretation.”
“the Petitioner's reliance on it to establish the national importance ofher proposed endeavor emphasizes the industry, rather than her specific proposed endeavor.”
“the Petitioner does not offer a sufficient evidentiary basis to conclude that the "ripple effects" of her specific proposed endeavor wi 11 rise to the level of national importance.”
“the authors do not sufficiently explain how the Petitioner's perfmmance or the results she achieved extended beyond her employer and the specific parties involved to impact the field more broadly.”
“the author offers few details or examples of what effect she had on her colleagues or how this effect had broader implications.”

AAO decision text

Prong 2 — well positionednot established · dispositive

“As the Petitioner's plans are vague and open-ended, we agree with the Director that the record does not reflect a sufficiently detailed model or plan for future activities.”
“the Director stated the Petitioner "has not provided any contracts, agreements, or other documentary evidence" ... of any progress in reaching the goals of her proposed endeavor.”
“this ce1iificate's date indicates she earned it after the filing date of the petition, and therefore it cannot serve as evidence of progress towards the endeavor at the time of filing.”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

  • business plan · discounted
    “the Petitioner leaves the proposed endeavor open to interpretation”
    AAO decision text
  • recommendation letter · discounted
    “the authors do not sufficiently explain how the Petitioner's performance...extended beyond her employer”
    AAO decision text
  • certification membership · discounted
    “she explained little about how she earned them”
    AAO decision text
  • resume experience · credited
  • degree · credited
All 6 evidence items
  • motion resubmission · discounted
    “On appeal, the Petitioner relies upon the evidence she previously submitted.”
    AAO decision text

Where this case turned

  • Economic claims unsupported · p1 — job/revenue projections with no corroborating basis
  • 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
  • Letters conclusory · p1 — letters praise skills in general terms without tracing specific impact
  • Letters not independent · p1 — letters come from employers and close collaborators, not independent experts
  • Business plan speculative · p2 — projections without a documented basis or steps
  • Education alone insufficient · p2 — degrees offered as positioning — credentials are not a track record
  • No progress evidence · p2 — no documented movement toward the endeavor since filing
  • 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 reversed the Director's implicit favorable finding on prong one (national importance was not analyzed by Director but AAO withdrew it), and also independently found threshold EB-2 eligibility satisfied despite the Director never having reached that issue.

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-
  • Poursina v. USCIS

Cases in adjacent profiles

← Back to the case explorer