NIW Bearings
dismissedJUN232023_01B52032023-06-23 · 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 sales professional, proposed either to continue working for U.S. companies as a Sales Manager in manufacturing, energy management, automation, or telecommunications, or alternatively to found and serve as CEO of his own consulting and installation company.

Field: sales management / manufacturing, energy management, automation, telecommunications · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

EB-2 threshold — not met

The record lacked an academic credentials evaluation establishing his foreign bachelor's and MBA equivalency to a U.S. advanced degree; AAO nonetheless proceeded to NIW analysis as an alternative ground.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“Here, the nature of the Petitioner's proposed endeavor is unclear.”
“we conclude that the Petitioner has not provided a specific or consistent proposed endeavor activity such that we can determine its substantial merit and national importance”
“merely working in an important field is insufficient to establish the national importance of the proposed endeavor”
“The Petitioner does not show through supporting documentation how providing services as a sales manager stands to sufficiently extend beyond his employer to broadly impact the industry or the U.S . economy.”
“the business plan does not sufficiently detail the basis for its financial and staffing projections, nor does it adequately explain how these projections will be realized”
“The Petitioner does not offer corroborating evidence that the area where his company operates is economically depressed, or that he would employ a significant population of workers in that area.”
“The economic benefits that the Petitioner claimed depend on numerous factors and the Petitioner did not offer a sufficiently direct evidentiary tie between his sales work and the claimed results.”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

  • recommendation letter · discounted
    “these letters do not address the specifics of the Petitioner's proposed endeavor or how his endeavor will substantially benefit the U.S. business or sales industry”
    AAO decision text
  • business plan · discounted
    “the business plan does not sufficiently detail the basis for its financial and staffing projections, nor does it adequately explain how these projections will be realized”
    AAO decision text
  • other · discounted
    “merely working in an important field is insufficient to establish the national importance of the proposed endeavor”
    AAO decision text
  • degree · discounted
    “the record does not contain an academic credentials evaluation to establish his foreign degrees' equivalency to a United States advanced degree”
    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
  • 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
  • Field importance conflated with endeavor · p1 — argues the field matters, not the specific endeavor
  • Occupational shortage argument rejected · p1 — argues a labor shortage — the labor-certification question, not Dhanasar
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 first found the Petitioner had not established advanced-degree eligibility due to missing credentials evaluation, but proceeded to analyze the NIW prongs anyway 'even if he had demonstrated his qualifications' rather than resting on the threshold failure alone. The Petitioner's shifting description of his endeavor (employee sales manager vs. entrepreneur/CEO) was central to the vagueness finding.

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
  • INA 203(b)(2)
  • Matter of E-M-
  • Matter of Ho
  • Matter of L-A-C-
  • Poursina v. USCIS

Cases in adjacent profiles

← Back to the case explorer