NIW Bearings
dismissedJUL102024_04B52032024-07-10 · combined · Nebraska 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 dermatologist, proposed an entrepreneurial dermatology business venture, with revised plans emphasizing investment in an economically underutilized area, though she disclaimed seeking HUBZone program benefits specifically.

Field: dermatology / entrepreneurial business · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“such a maneuver would not establish the national importance of her endeavor under prong one of the framework discussed in Matter of Dhanasar”
“the record does not establish that, beyond the limited benefits provided to its prospective clients and employees, the Petitioner's proposed endeavor has broader implications rising to the level of having national importance”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

  • business plan · discounted
    “the record does not establish that... the Petitioner's proposed endeavor has broader implications rising to the level of having national importance”
    AAO decision text
  • motion resubmission · discounted
    “Reasserting previously stated facts or resubmitting previously provided evidence does not constitute "new facts."”
    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
  • 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

This is a combined motion to reopen/reconsider following a prior AAO appellate dismissal; the AAO found no new facts or legal error, largely reaffirming its earlier decision on the HUBZone/business-location argument. A footnote notes the Petitioner later filed and was approved on a new EB-2 petition in 2024.

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. 103.5(a)(2)
  • 8 C.F.R. 103.5(a)(3)
  • INA 203(b)(2)
  • INA 291
  • Matter of O-S-G-

Cases in adjacent profiles

← Back to the case explorer