dismissedJUN112024_03B52032024-06-11 · 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 secondary school language teacher, proposed to continue teaching and developing a Portuguese/multilingual curriculum in U.S. public schools, including creating a multilingual tutoring program.

Field: language education (Portuguese/Spanish/bilingual curriculum) · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

EB-2 threshold — addressed

Director and AAO agreed Petitioner qualified as an advanced degree professional; not disputed on appeal.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“Yet, the record does not establish that the endeavor rises to the level of national importance as contemplated in Dhanasar.”

“the Petitioner has not shown that her curriculum development would result in impacts to other school districts' curriculum development or otherwise result in impacts in the language education field.”

“these articles and industry reports establish the substantial merit of the Petitioner's endeavor, not its national importance.”

“Without sufficient information or evidence regarding any projected U.S. economic impact or job creation attributable to her future work, the record does not indicate that the benefits to the regional or national economy resulting from the Petitioner's teaching activities would reach the level of "substantial positive economic effects"”

“Generalized conclusory statements that do not identify a specific impact in the field have little probative value.”

“the letters of recommendation contained in the record do not establish the national importance of the Petitioner's proposed endeavor, as they are limited to discussing her past accomplishments as a teacher”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

recommendation letter · discounted
“the letters of recommendation contained in the record do not establish the national importance of the Petitioner's proposed endeavor”
AAO decision text
media · discounted
“these articles and industry reports establish the substantial merit of the Petitioner's endeavor, not its national importance”
AAO decision text
resume experience · discounted
“a petitioner must establish eligibility for the benefit sought at the time the petition is filed”
AAO decision text
other · discounted
“she has not demonstrated that her undertaking has implications beyond the students under her tutelage”
AAO decision text

Where this case turned

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
Letters conclusory · p1 — letters praise skills in general terms without tracing specific impact
Local, not national scope · p1 — impact confined to clients / a region

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

AAO noted the Petitioner's CV showed she began employment with the letter-writer's institution the same month the petition was denied, ten months after filing, so that curriculum work could not be relied upon under the filing-date eligibility rule (Matter of Katigbak).

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. 103.2(b)(1)
8 C.F.R. 103.3
8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(2)
Flores v. Garland
Matter of Katigbak
Matter of L-A-C-

Cases in adjacent profiles

← Back to the case explorer