NIW Bearings
dismissedJUL102024_07B52032024-07-10 · 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 sought to operate his own IT consulting company, C-, as CEO and technical leader, providing digital transformation services including cloud infrastructure, unified communication, network architecture and security, and storage solutions.

Field: information technology / IT consulting · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“Much of the Petitioner's evidence relates to the importance of current software and infrastructure development practices in the IT industry, STEM employment, and entrepreneurship generally, rather than the importance of his specific proposed endeavor to our nation.”
“But the basis for these projections is not sufficiently supported in the record.”
“Here, the Petitioner has not substantiated the basis for his net sales forecasts, or for the prospective financial metrics included in his business plan with sufficient independent, objective evidence.”
“As such, we will not further consider the tenuous, indirect consequences of a petitioner's activity when determining whether it is of national importance.”
“Generalized conclusory statements that do not identify specific [prospective] contributions or their impact in the field have little probative value.”
“Here, the record does not establish that his proposed endeavor stands to substantially impact the field at a level commensurate with national importance.”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

  • business plan · discounted
    “the basis for these projections is not sufficiently supported in the record”
    AAO decision text
  • recommendation letter · discounted
    “the submitted letters do not provide sufficient clarity regarding the national importance of the specific endeavor”
    AAO decision text
  • other · discounted
    “he does not offer an analytical roadmap that adequately lays out the basis for his opinion”
    AAO decision text
  • resume experience · credited
  • other · discounted
    “they do not sufficiently support a finding that his specific proposed endeavor has national importance”
    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
  • Letters conclusory · p1 — letters praise skills in general terms without tracing specific impact
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 explicitly declined to reach prongs 2 and 3 as unnecessary given dispositive prong 1 failure. The Director had found prong 2 met but prong 3 not met; AAO reserved these findings without disturbing them. The Petitioner's use of the RIMS II economic model to project indirect job creation was rejected as speculative and insufficiently substantiated.

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
  • USCIS Policy Manual F.5(D)(2)

Cases in adjacent profiles

← Back to the case explorer