NIW Bearings
dismissedJUN122024_03B52032024-06-12 · combined · 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 operate a Jiu Jitsu company, claiming this endeavor would positively impact the national economy and the field of athletic training.

Field: martial arts / athletic training (Jiu Jitsu company) · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

EB-2 threshold — not met

Record did not establish five years of progressive experience after the baccalaureate degree; inconsistencies existed regarding the nature, date, and duration of employment (simultaneous full-time student, pet memorial business operator, and full-time sporting events organizer). Not the basis of dismissal since Petitioner was not previously on notice.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“We found the Petitioner did not establish the national importance of his proposed endeavor.”
“the evidence did not demonstrate the Petitioner's proposed Jiu Jitsu company would positively impact the national economy”
“the record did not establish that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor would reach beyond his company and clients to have broader implications on the field of athletic training”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

  • resume experience · discounted
    “the record did not demonstrate he had five years of progressive experience in his specialty after he obtained his baccalaureate degree”
    AAO decision text
  • motion resubmission · ignored
    “the Petitioner does not assert any new facts and does not submit any evidence”
    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
  • 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

Petitioner's motion failed to identify any specific new facts, evidence, or error of law, leading the AAO to summarily reaffirm its prior decision by incorporation; underlying inconsistencies in employment history (simultaneous full-time student, business operator, and event organizer) were noted but not the dispositive basis for dismissal due to lack of prior notice.

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)(1)(ii)
  • 8 C.F.R. 103.5(a)(2)
  • 8 C.F.R. 103.5(a)(3)
  • 8 C.F.R. 103.5(a)(4)
  • Matter of Coelho

Cases in adjacent profiles

← Back to the case explorer