dismissedJUL282021_03B52032021-07-28 · 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, a software developer, proposed to continue working in IT—developing, maintaining, and engineering websites and software systems for U.S. companies, including a university's continuing-education division.
Field: software development / IT · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“he has not offered sufficient information and evidence to demonstrate that the prospective impact of his proposed endeavor rises to the level of national importance”
“the record does not show that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor stands to sufficiently extend beyond his employer and its IT systems' users to impact the field or the U.S. higher education system more broadly”
“a shortage alone does not demonstrate that waiving the requirement of a labor certification would benefit the United States”
“Without sufficient information or evidence regarding any projected U.S. economic impact or job creation attributable to his future work”
“the relevant question is not the importance of the field, industry, or profession in which the individual will work”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- recommendation letter · discounted
“the record does not show that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor stands to sufficiently extend beyond his employer and its IT systems' users”
AAO decision text - resume experience · discounted
“The Petitioner's skills and knowledge in his field relate to the second prong of the Dhanasar framework”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“he has not offered sufficient information and evidence to demonstrate that the prospective impact of his proposed endeavor rises to the level of national importance”
AAO decision text
Where this case turned
- 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
2,589coded 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 rejecting the Petitioner's IT-worker-shortage argument by noting that shortages are properly addressed through the labor certification process rather than a national interest waiver.
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.
- Poursina v. USCIS
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