NIW Bearings
dismissedJUL292016_03B52032016-07-29 · motion_reopen · Nebraska 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 business development manager/consultant, sought to continue advising U.S. companies using a Balanced Scorecard-based strategic framework, claiming she had originated modifications to that approach.

Field: business development / management consulting · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

EB-2 threshold — not met

AAO withdrew the Director's favorable finding, holding the Petitioner had not established her foreign degree's U.S. equivalency, had not documented a claimed EMBA, and had not satisfied any regulatory criteria for exceptional ability.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“the record did not demonstrate that her work had some degree of influence on the field as a whole”
“The record, however, does not indicate that the benefits of her work would extend beyond her business clients such that they will have a national impact.”
“he does not provide any specific examples of how the Petitioner's work has influenced the field as a whole”
“she had not submitted sufficient documentation to support the assertions regarding her past success in her field”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

  • recommendation letter · discounted
    “he does not provide any specific examples of how the Petitioner's work has influenced the field as a whole”
    AAO decision text
  • degree · discounted
    “she has not provided a credential evaluation to establish its equivalency to a United States degree”
    AAO decision text
  • contract revenue · discounted
    “Eligibility must be established at the time of filing.”
    AAO decision text
  • resume experience · discounted
    “She does not offer any new facts that would serve as bases for overcoming our latest decision.”
    AAO decision text
  • motion resubmission · discounted
    “In her brief, the Petitioner repeats arguments previously offered in support of her appeal and earlier motions.”
    AAO decision text

Where this case turned

  • Economic claims unsupported · p1 — job/revenue projections with no corroborating basis
  • Letters conclusory · p1 — letters praise skills in general terms without tracing specific impact
  • Local, not national scope · p1 — impact confined to clients / a region
  • Record of success insufficient · p1 — a claimed track record the documents do not establish
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

Third motion to reopen in a case governed by the pre-Dhanasar NYSDOT framework; AAO's national-interest analysis (lack of field-wide/national impact) maps most closely to prong 1's national-scope element, with no clear analog discussed for a 'well-positioned' (p2) or comparative-benefit (p3) inquiry. AAO also affirmed its earlier reversal of the Director's finding that the Petitioner qualified for the underlying advanced-degree/exceptional-ability classification, making the denial doubly dispositive.

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. 103.5(a)(2)
  • Matter of Katigbak
  • Matter of Otiende
  • Section 291 of the Act

What this case teaches

Analyst reading of the decision text.

Decisive factor

Repeated failure to provide documentary evidence that petitioner's methods or work influenced the field as a whole, plus failure to establish underlying classification eligibility (degree equivalency, exceptional ability criteria).

Transferable lesson

Support claims of originality and field-wide influence with independent documentary evidence, not just recommender assertions, and substantiate underlying degree/classification eligibility.

Endeavor framing

vague

National-importance theory

economic_growth_generic

Evidence targeting

person_focused

Cases in adjacent profiles

← Back to the case explorer