NIW Bearings
dismissedJUN132025_04B52032025-06-13 · 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 systems engineer, proposed to start a business using automation and business-intelligence software to help EPC and other industrial/commercial companies improve their supply chain management, initially in Texas and Louisiana and later nationwide.

Field: supply chain management / systems engineering · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“they largely focus on its role in managing supply chains and do not specifically show the government's interest in the Petitioner's proposed endeavor”
“the relevant question is not the importance of the industry or profession in which the individual will work”
“The Petitioner does not offer evidence to demonstrate or explain how hiring five employees shows the proposed endeavor's significant potential to employ U.S. workers.”
“he has not shown that the benefits to the regional or national economy resulting from his undertaking would reach the level of "substantial positive economic effects"”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

  • media · discounted
    “these articles are not sufficient to establish the national importance of the proposed endeavor”
    AAO decision text
  • business plan · discounted
    “he has not shown that the benefits to the regional or national economy... would reach the level of "substantial positive economic effects"”
    AAO decision text
  • recommendation letter · discounted
    “This evidence may be relevant to establishing that the Petitioner satisfies the second prong... [not] the first prong”
    AAO decision text
  • certification membership · discounted
    “This evidence may be relevant to establishing that the Petitioner satisfies the second prong... [not] the first prong”
    AAO decision text
  • resume experience · discounted
    “This evidence may be relevant to establishing that the Petitioner satisfies the second prong... [not] the first prong”
    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
  • 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 dismissed solely on prong 1 (national importance), expressly declining to reach prong 2, prong 3, or the underlying exceptional-ability classification, citing INS v. Bagamasbad against advisory findings; decision states each stated reason is an independent and alternate basis for dismissal.

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.

  • Flores v. Garland

What this case teaches

Analyst reading of the decision text.

Decisive factor

Supply-chain executive orders proved the field matters to the government, not that his five-person consultancy would impact it; client-bounded efficiency benefits failed prong-1 national importance.

Transferable lesson

A presidential executive order about your field is field-level evidence; it does not show government interest in your endeavor, and client-level efficiency gains do not scale into national importance.

Endeavor framing

moderate

National-importance theory

government_interest · national_security · economic_growth_generic

Evidence targeting

person_focused

Cases in adjacent profiles

← Back to the case explorer