dismissedJUN262024_01B52032024-06-26 · 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, a software developer, proposed an endeavor he characterized as innovative and relevant to global issues, with claimed potential to stimulate the software industry and the broader economy.
Field: information technology / software development · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“the Petitioner did not establish the national importance of his proposed endeavor.”
“he did not demonstrate his proposed endeavor would have economic effects on a level of national importance.”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- recommendation letter · discounted
“We reviewed the opinion letters ... but concluded he did not demonstrate his proposed endeavor would have economic effects.”
AAO decision text - resume experience · discounted
“evidence of the Petitioner's extensive work experience and education ... did not demonstrate his proposed endeavor would have economic effects.”
AAO decision text - degree · discounted
“evidence of the Petitioner's extensive work experience and education ... did not demonstrate his proposed endeavor would have economic effects.”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“they did not address his specific proposed endeavor.”
AAO decision text - motion resubmission · ignored
“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
2,589coded 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 to reopen submitted no new evidence and the motion to reconsider failed to identify any specific legal or factual error in the prior decision, resulting in dismissal without reaching the exceptional-ability threshold issue, which AAO expressly reserved.
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)
- 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(3)(ii)
- Matter of Coelho
- Matter of L-A-C-
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