NIW Bearings
dismissedJAN182024_08B52032024-01-18 · 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, a petroleum engineer with over 18 years of experience in the Venezuelan oil industry, established a U.S. company to provide business-planning, organizational, and project-management consulting services to oil and gas companies, and to offer training programs to industry workers.

Field: petroleum engineering / oil and gas consulting · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“we agree that she has not established that her proposed endeavor is of national importance”
“That description states that the Petitioner plans to establish a company to "provide specialized advice ... in matters of oil fields,"”
“these projections are not well supported and do not reflect that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor has a significant potential to employ U.S. workers”
“it is the individual's speci fie endeavor that is the focus of the first prong analysis, not that of the field or industry”
“the Petitioner has not established that her training program would have broader implications for the U.S. oil and gas industry beyond those workers that would be trained”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

  • business plan · discounted
    “these projections are not well supported and do not reflect that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor has ... substantial positive economic effects”
    AAO decision text
  • recommendation letter · ignored
    “the Petitioner does not explain how the other evidence ... including letters of recommendation ... establish the national importance of her proposed endeavor”
    AAO decision text
  • resume experience · discounted
    “factors such as a petitioner's educations, skills, and record of success ... are analyzed under the second prong”
    AAO decision text

Where this case turned

  • Business plan speculative · p1 — projections without a documented basis or steps
  • 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
1,312coded 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 found the petitioner conflated the two elements of prong 1 (substantial merit vs. national importance) by misapplying Dhanasar's economic-benefit language, and rejected her argument that her 18 years of industry experience itself conferred national significance, distinguishing field-level importance from endeavor-specific importance.

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
  • 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(2)
  • 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(3)(ii)
  • 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(3)(iii)
  • Matter of L-A-C-
  • Poursina v. USCIS
  • USCIS Policy Manual F.5(B)(2)

Cases in adjacent profiles

← Back to the case explorer