dismissedJUL142021_07B52032021-07-14 · 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.
A software engineer with about 29 years of experience proposed to work through his own U.S. company as a software and systems development consultant to companies in various sectors, including financial markets and investment, while planning to hire additional staff.
Field: software engineering · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — addressed
Director found Petitioner qualifies as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree; not disputed on appeal.
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“The verbatim language from the O*NET summary report does not establish what the specific endeavor would entail, beyond matching the generalized tasks of positions in the same occupational category”
“the record does not establish how the endeavor would have broader implications in terms of significant potential to employ U.S. workers or have substantial positive economic effects, beyond the Petitioner's employers”
“the record does not establish whether the potential to employ U.S. workers is significant, and whether the potential positive economic effects would be substantial”
“the Petitioner's focus on appeal on the field of software development, businesses, and the "vitality to the global market" in general does not address aspects of the specific endeavor”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- other · discounted
“does not establish how the endeavor would have broader implications ... beyond the Petitioner's employers”
AAO decision text
Where this case turned
- Economic claims unsupported · p1 — job/revenue projections with no corroborating basis
- Employer-specific benefit · p1 — "work furthers my company's product" — value accrues to one firm
- 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
2,501coded 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
The decision includes a footnote noting that Dhanasar vacated the prior NYSDOT precedent, but the AAO applies the current Dhanasar framework throughout, not the legacy test. The Director had reached prong three without addressing prong two, but the AAO resolves the case solely on prong one, reserving opinion on the others.
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