NIW Bearings
dismissedJUL112024_01B52032024-07-11 · 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 create a company providing outsourced aviation supply chain services (sourcing, purchasing, maintenance, overhaul management, logistics, and related tasks) to aircraft-maintenance vendors in Florida and another metropolitan area.

Field: aviation supply chain management · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

EB-2 threshold — addressed

AAO agreed Petitioner qualifies as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“the Petitioner must demonstrate the national importance of his specific, proposed endeavor of providing his services as a supply chain director through his company”
“the articles submitted regarding the supply chain problems and solutions do not establish the national importance of the proposed endeavor”
“Generalized conclusory statements that do not identify a specific impact in the field have little probative value.”
“The alleged shortage of occupations or occupational skills does not render his proposed endeavor nationally important under the Dhanasar framework.”
“the Petitioner did not present supporting evidence to corroborate the assertions and figures”
“the Petitioner did not demonstrate the relevance of these numbers and show that such future staffing levels would provide substantial economic benefits”
“the recommendations do not show the broader impact of the Petitioner's work and is limited to his specific collaborators”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

  • recommendation letter · discounted
    “the recommendations do not show the broader impact of the Petitioner's work and is limited to his specific collaborators”
    AAO decision text
  • business plan · discounted
    “the Petitioner did not present supporting evidence to corroborate the assertions and figures”
    AAO decision text
  • resume experience · discounted
    “relates more to the second prong rather than the first prong of national importance of the Dhanasar framework”
    AAO decision text
  • certification membership · discounted
    “the fact that the Petitioner has many certifications and years of experience, does not indicate the national impact of his proposed endeavor”
    AAO decision text
  • other · discounted
    “the matter here is not whether these initiatives...are nationally important”
    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
  • Local, not national scope · p1 — impact confined to clients / a region
  • Occupational shortage argument rejected · p1 — argues a labor shortage — the labor-certification question, not Dhanasar
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 frames its national-importance dismissal as an independent and alternate basis, declining to reach prongs 2 and 3 per Bagamashad/L-A-C- citing agencies need not make advisory findings.

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
  • Matter of E-M-
  • Matter of L-A-C-

Cases in adjacent profiles

← Back to the case explorer