NIW Bearings
dismissedJUN102025_06B52032025-06-10 · appeal

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 pharmacist, proposed to establish and operate a pharmaceutical consulting firm in Florida offering specialized services to physicians and clinics regarding new drugs and treatments.

Field: pharmaceutical consulting · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

EB-2 threshold — not met

AAO withdrew SCOPS' finding that Petitioner qualified as an advanced degree professional, finding his Brazilian 'lato sensu' MBA certificate was not equivalent to a graduate degree and that he had not submitted evidence of post-baccalaureate progressive work experience letters. AAO reserved the exceptional-ability alternative as unnecessary given the dispositive prong-1 denial.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“the evidence does not establish that operating a pharmaceutical consulting business will have broader implications or influence in the field that will rise to the level of national importance.”
“the record does not establish that the endeavor will have a measurable impact beyond the immediate community it serves to reach the level of national or even global impact.”
“the Petitioner does not provide sufficient detail regarding the basis for these projections or adequately explain how the proposed staffing targets and revenue forecasts will be reached.”
“although the Petitioner argues that his endeavor aligns with government initiatives, alignment with government initiatives alone is not sufficient for national importance.”
“they are generally immaterial to the first Dhanasar prong-whether a specific, prospective, proposed endeavor has both substantial merit and national importance.”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

  • recommendation letter · discounted
    “they are generally immaterial to the first Dhanasar prong”
    AAO decision text
  • business plan · discounted
    “does not provide sufficient detail regarding the basis for these projections”
    AAO decision text
  • degree · discounted
    “a lato sensu course certificate is not necessarily evidence of completion of a graduate degree program”
    AAO decision text
  • resume experience · discounted
    “has not submitted evidence of post-baccalaureate progressive work experience”
    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
  • 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
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 withdrew SCOPS' favorable finding on the underlying EB-2 advanced-degree classification (rejecting a Brazilian 'lato sensu' MBA as not degree-equivalent) but declined to remand for exceptional-ability review since the NIW denial on prong 1 was dispositive. AAO also engaged in an extended, skeptical analysis of the Petitioner's claimed SBA HUBZone designation, questioning whether his wholly-owned firm would even qualify for the program he invoked as evidence of national importance.

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
  • 8 C.F.R. 204.5(g)(1)
  • 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(2)
  • Flores v. Garland
  • Matter of L-A-C-
  • USCIS Policy Manual F.5(B)(2)

Cases in adjacent profiles

← Back to the case explorer