The petitioner, a data analyst and digital signal processing engineer, proposed to continue working with his employer to advance passive millimeter-wave (PMMW) imaging through signal processing, AI/ML, and statistical methods for defense, aviation security, homeland security, and public safety applications.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“the record does not contain evidence sufficient to demonstrate the national importance of the Petitioner's specific endeavor”

“evidence concerning his employment activities is limited to his own statements; the record does not include evidence from his employer or from an objective source discussing his work”

“he has not submitted evidence demonstrating how that work has or will impact his field to rise to the level of national importance”

AAO decision text

Prong 2 — well positionednot established · dispositive

“the record does not include any corroborating evidence of the Petitioner's current employment, and information concerning his job duties is limited to what he provided in his own statements”

“the record does not include letters confirming the Petitioner's employment duties, skills, or accomplishments with his employer, nor does the record include evidence of his involvement with specific projects”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

• contract revenue · discounted

  “the record does not contain evidence sufficient to demonstrate the national importance of the Petitioner's specific endeavor”

  AAO decision text
• citations publications · discounted

  “he has not submitted evidence demonstrating how that work has or will impact his field to rise to the level of national importance”

  AAO decision text
• resume experience · discounted

  “information concerning his job duties is limited to what he provided in his own statements”

  AAO decision text
• degree · credited
• other · discounted

  “the record demonstrates the importance of the field in which the Petitioner intends to work... but the record does not contain evidence sufficient to demonstrate the national importance of the Petitioner's specific endeavor”

  AAO decision text

Where this case turned

• Economic claims unsupported · p1 — job/revenue projections with no corroborating basis
• Field importance conflated with endeavor · p1 — argues the field matters, not the specific endeavor
• 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

Notable

AAO explicitly withdrew SCOPS's favorable second-prong finding, holding the petitioner's own uncorroborated statements about his job duties and Navy-contract work insufficient absent employer or third-party letters, illustrating that AAO review can be stricter than the underlying service center determination even where AAO agrees with the denial's ultimate outcome.

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
• Flores v. Garland

Cases in adjacent profiles

• The Petitioner, a mechanical engineer, proposed to advance thermal management solutions for high-power, compact, and rel
• The Petitioner, a senior engineering program manager specializing in electromechanical systems, proposed to advance moto
• The Petitioner proposed to provide innovative solutions to optimize freight and vessel operations in the U.S. shipping i
• The Petitioner, a sales manager, proposed an endeavor in the United States for which he sought an EB-2 national interest
• The Petitioner proposed to lead a nationwide initiative to develop and implement a standardized materials management mod