NIW Bearings
dismissedJAN222026_02B52032026-01-22 · 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 proposed to own and operate a consultancy and advisory firm focused on event planning, coordination, and professional training in the United States. He claimed the business model was scalable and replicable across diverse U.S. markets.

Field: event planning and coordination · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

EB-2 threshold — addressed

SCOPS found the Petitioner qualified under the advanced degree track via a bachelor's degree in tourism plus at least five years of progressive experience in his specialty per 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2). Not disputed on appeal.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“the record does not show that the impact of the endeavor would extend beyond the Petitioner's company and clients or influence the event planning industry.”
“the Petitioner has not established that his company's staffing levels or its business activity would provide substantial economic benefits to any particular locality or to the United States overall.”
“the Petitioner's projected five-year revenues of approximately $7 million would significantly impact the event planning industry, which the business plan shows as having a U.S. market of nearly $400 billion.”
“the evidence in the record does not establish that the Petitioner has a particular events planning service model or methodology that is replicable, different from what is currently available in the industry.”
“SCOPS highlighted the importance of focusing on the proposed endeavor rather than the Petitioner's field when determining whether the specific endeavor would have national or even global implications.”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

  • business plan · discounted
    “the Petitioner has not established that his company's staffing levels or its business activity would provide substantial economic benefits to any particular locality or to the United States overall.”
    AAO decision text
  • recommendation letter · discounted
    “such letters merely explain how the prospective clients would benefit from the Petitioner's services; they do not, however, serve as evidence that the proposed endeavor would extend to broadly impact events planning or other industries.”
    AAO decision text
  • other · discounted
    “the evidence was insufficient to show the importance of the Petitioner's proposed endeavor on a national scale.”
    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
  • 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
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

SCOPS found substantial merit (prong 1, first element) but denied on national importance (prong 1, second element); the AAO adopted and affirmed SCOPS' analysis wholesale under Matter of Burbano. The petitioner is an event planner — an unusual occupational archetype for NIW — whose projected $7 million five-year revenue was explicitly contrasted against a ~$400 billion U.S. market to illustrate the endeavor's negligible national-scale impact. Prong 2 and prong 3 were expressly reserved as unnecessary to reach.

Cases in adjacent profiles

← Back to the case explorer