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 design architect, proposed to work as a Building Information Modeling (BIM) specialist in sustainable architecture design, aiming to minimize environmental impact of buildings.
Field: sustainable architecture / building information modeling (BIM) · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — addressed
Director found Petitioner qualified as an advanced degree professional; this was not disputed.
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“the record does not show that the benefits of his planning and design work would extend beyond his firm and its architectural projects at a level sufficient to demonstrate the national importance of his endeavor”
“his BIM activities do not meet the "national importance" element of the first prong of the Dhanasar framework”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- other · discounted
“without sufficient documentation of their broader impact, his BIM activities do not meet the "national importance" element”
AAO decision text
Where this case turned
- Employer-specific benefit · p1 — "work furthers my company's product" — value accrues to one firm
- Endeavor too vague · p1 — described as a job role, not a defined undertaking
- Local, not national scope · p1 — impact confined to clients / a region
- No progress evidence · p2 — no documented movement toward the endeavor since filing
- Derivative of Prong 1/2 failure · p3 — prong three fails only because prongs one or two did — no independent ground
Notable
Appeal was summarily dismissed as abandoned under 8 C.F.R. 103.2(b)(13)(i) for failure to respond to an AAO-issued RFE; AAO also addressed the merits 'in the alternative,' finding the Dhanasar prongs unmet, with prong 1 explicitly dispositive of the alternative merits analysis.
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.
- INA 203(b)(2)
Cases in adjacent profiles
- The Petitioner, a mechanical engineer, proposed to advance thermal management solutions for high-power, compact, and rel
- The Petitioner, a senior engineering program manager specializing in electromechanical systems, proposed to advance moto
- The Petitioner proposed to provide innovative solutions to optimize freight and vessel operations in the U.S. shipping i
- The Petitioner, a sales manager, proposed an endeavor in the United States for which he sought an EB-2 national interest
- The Petitioner proposed to lead a nationwide initiative to develop and implement a standardized materials management mod