NIW Bearings
dismissedJAN132026_01B52032026-01-13 · 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, a senior machine learning engineer, proposed to develop AI-driven intelligent manufacturing systems for the automotive sector, encompassing cross-domain data integration, explainable AI for risk control, and an AI-native workforce learning platform.

Field: machine learning / artificial intelligence (automotive manufacturing) · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

EB-2 threshold — addressed

SCOPS found the Petitioner qualifies as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree (master's in data informatics, 2019); not contested on appeal.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“the record does not include adequate corroborating evidence, to show that the Petitioner's specific proposed endeavor offers broader implications in his field”
“the authors do not sufficiently explain how the Petitioner's specific projects at [employer] stand to have an impact that extends beyond the company and its clients”
“alignment with general national goals, in and of itself, does not necessarily establish that the Petitioner's endeavor rises to the level of national importance”
“the record does not contain evidence demonstrating that his proposed work will result in job creation beyond speculative or indirect effects”
“the relevant question is not the importance of the industry or profession in which the individual will work”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

  • recommendation letter · discounted
    “they do not offer sufficient, detailed, and concrete examples of how the Petitioner's endeavor has the potential for broad and measurable implications for the country”
    AAO decision text
  • recommendation letter · discounted
    “the authors do not sufficiently explain how the Petitioner's specific projects at [employer] stand to have an impact that extends beyond the company and its clients”
    AAO decision text
  • resume experience · discounted
    “the Petitioner's professional experiences are generally material to Dhanasar's second prong... but they are generally immaterial to the first Dhanasar prong”
    AAO decision text
  • citations publications · discounted
    “the Petitioner did not previously identify dissemination of research as a component of his proposed endeavor and were only introduced for the first time in response to SCOPS' RFE”
    AAO decision text
  • other · discounted
    “the Petitioner has not provided evidence detailing the extent of his individual contribution to the project as compared to the contributions of other collaborators”
    AAO decision text
All 6 evidence items
  • degree · credited

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
  • Field importance conflated with endeavor · p1 — argues the field matters, not the specific endeavor
  • Local, not national scope · p1 — impact confined to clients / a region
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 AAO noted that the Petitioner's claim of co-authoring a knowledge-graph system used by the U.S. Department of Defense was not adequately documented and, in any event, was treated as relevant to Prong 2 rather than Prong 1. The AAO also flagged that the Petitioner's plan to publish peer-reviewed research was introduced for the first time in the RFE response and had not been identified as a component of the original proposed endeavor, undermining its weight. The record does not clearly demonstrate how the Petitioner would pursue the endeavor independently of his current employer.

What this case teaches

Analyst reading of the decision text.

Decisive factor

Benefits accrued to his employer (millions saved for the company); his individual contribution to the cited DoD project was unshown; dissemination was introduced only at RFE; and job creation was speculative.

Transferable lesson

Saving your employer millions is employer benefit, not national importance; a contribution to a government project needs your specific role shown, not the project's scale.

Endeavor framing

moderate

National-importance theory

critical_emerging_tech · us_competitiveness · economic_job_creation

Evidence targeting

mixed

Cases in adjacent profiles

← Back to the case explorer