dismissedJAN282026_06B52032026-01-28 · 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 develop hardware-level threat mitigation protocols incorporating post-quantum cryptography to strengthen critical infrastructure and Internet of Things systems against cyber threats, including AI-driven anomaly detection for SoC architectures.
Field: system-on-chip (SoC) security, post-quantum cryptography, cybersecurity · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — addressed
SCOPS found the petitioner qualifies as an advanced degree professional; AAO did not disturb this finding.
Prong 1 — national importanceestablished
“Considering the totality of the evidence submitted, the Petitioner has sufficiently shown the substantial merit and national importance of his proposed endeavor.”
“we will withdraw SCOPS' determination on the issue of national importance and conclude that the Petitioner meets this prong.”
AAO decision text
Prong 2 — well positionednot established · dispositive
“his resume does not include detailed descriptions of his duties performed within each job. It is unclear then what activities the Petitioner performed while in these positions”
“the record shows he has only published five articles between the years 2012 and 2024.”
“the record shows he has only published five articles with 27 total citations at the time of filing, despite the first article's publication in 2012.”
“the letters generally express that the Petitioner's work is helping to advance the field, they do not detail a record of success or progress in his efforts.”
“he has not shown that his future job and its duties would coincide with his proposed work, such that it would well position him to advance his endeavor.”
“the Petitioner's personal statements simply describe the projects that the Petitioner intends to pursue if he is able to locate employment. This is insufficient to show he has made progress toward advancing his proposed endeavor.”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- resume experience · discounted
“his resume does not include detailed descriptions of his duties performed within each job”
AAO decision text - citations publications · discounted
“the record shows he has only published five articles with 27 total citations at the time of filing”
AAO decision text - recommendation letter · discounted
“the letters generally express that the Petitioner's work is helping to advance the field, they do not detail a record of success or progress in his efforts”
AAO decision text - business plan · discounted
“his lack of specificity as to how he will conduct and advance his research at an unknown employer's company in an undefined position is not sufficient”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“the evidence reflects other researchers primarily cited his coauthored papers in a comparative manner as one of many other studies”
AAO decision text
Where this case turned
- Business plan speculative · p2 — projections without a documented basis or steps
- Citations insufficient · p2 — citation counts without qualitative account of impact
- Letters conclusory · p2 — letters praise skills in general terms without tracing specific impact
- 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
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 reversed SCOPS on prong 1, finding national importance established, but affirmed denial on prong 2. The petitioner cited Buletini v. INS arguing abuse of discretion for failure to consider all evidence; AAO rejected this argument. AAO also noted that post-filing citation increases (from 1 to 6 for the 2024 paper) could not be considered because eligibility is assessed at time of filing. The NVIDIA job posting submitted by petitioner was found to have duties not corresponding to the proposed endeavor, undermining rather than supporting the plan for future activities.
Cases in adjacent profiles
- The Petitioner, a senior principal biostatistician, proposes to develop innovative statistical and machine-learning meth
- The Petitioner proposed to use advanced deep learning and machine learning models to create efficient, safe, and well-pe
- The Petitioner proposes to advance machine learning methods for the design and optimization of advanced metamaterials an
- The Petitioner, a postdoctoral chemist, proposed to continue developing high-performance materials and novel synthetic m
- The Petitioner proposes to design novel sensor data processing methods and machine learning algorithms for smart wearabl