NIW Bearings
dismissedJUL222024_04B52032024-07-22 · 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 establish a jewelry manufacturing, distribution, research, and consulting business in the United States, including opening a jewelry factory, a research/training center, and assisting U.S. law enforcement in identifying counterfeit jewelry.

Field: jewelry manufacturing/goldsmithing · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

EB-2 threshold — not met

AAO found the Petitioner, a goldsmith, did not establish he is a member of the professions because a U.S. bachelor's degree is not the minimum requirement for entry into the occupation per O*NET, despite having the foreign equivalent of a bachelor's degree plus five years of progressive experience.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“the Petitioner has not provided independent, corroborating evidence of his claims of having "innovative technologies" or that such technologies have the potential to improve jewelry manufacturing”
“The articles submitted do not discuss any projected U.S. economic impact or job creation specifically attributable to the Petitioner's proposed endeavor.”
“the Petitioner's teaching to others in his field does not rise to the level of having national importance”
“General statements about researching "innovative technologies and techniques" are not sufficient for us to determine whether his endeavor rises to the level of national importance.”
“without sufficient documentary evidence that his proposed job duties as the owner and a goldsmith for his business would impact the jewelry industry more broadly, rather than benefiting his business and his proposed clients, the Petitioner has not demonstrated by a preponderance of the evidence that his proposed endeavor is of national importance”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

  • recommendation letter · discounted
    “The submission of letters from experts supporting the petition is not presumptive evidence of eligibility.”
    AAO decision text
  • patents · discounted
    “the Petitioner did not submit evidence showing the approval of either patent application or details or approval for his third claimed patent”
    AAO decision text
  • business plan · discounted
    “General statements about researching "innovative technologies and techniques" are not sufficient for us to determine whether his endeavor rises to the level of national importance.”
    AAO decision text
  • media · discounted
    “The articles submitted do not discuss any projected U.S. economic impact or job creation specifically attributable to the Petitioner's proposed endeavor.”
    AAO decision text
  • degree · discounted
    “Without further evidence, the Petitioner has not demonstrated that his intended occupation of working as a goldsmith for his jewelry business requires the minimum of a U.S. bachelor's degree”
    AAO decision text
All 6 evidence items
  • resume experience · discounted
    “the Petitioner's reliance on his professional knowledge and experience relates to the second prong of the Dhanasar framework, instead of speaking to the 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
  • Letters conclusory · p1 — letters praise skills in general terms without tracing specific impact
  • 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

AAO first withdrew the Director's favorable finding on the underlying EB-2 professional classification, holding a goldsmith is not a 'profession' under 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(2) since O*NET indicates the occupation typically requires only vocational training or an associate's degree, not a bachelor's degree. AAO then proceeded to address the NIW merits anyway, ultimately resting dismissal on prong 1 national importance and declining to reach prongs 2 and 3, which the Director had also addressed (finding prong 2 met, prong 3 not met) but which AAO reserved.

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 Caron Int'l
  • Matter of D-R-
  • Matter of E-M-
  • Matter of L-A-C-

Cases in adjacent profiles

← Back to the case explorer