dismissedJUN272025_02B52032025-06-27 · 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 part-time PhD research assistant in Computer Science and Engineering, proposed to apply advanced AI and machine learning techniques to optimize data analysis and improve outcomes in healthcare, smart cities, and STEM education, with a longer-term goal of becoming a university professor.
Field: artificial intelligence / machine learning · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
Prong 1 — national importanceestablished
Prong 2 — well positionednot established · dispositive
“The Petitioner's present level of education does not currently support the claim that he is well-positioned to advance the proposed endeavor.”
“The record does not include supporting documentation of his duties as an instructor and a software engineer, and how they make him well-positioned to advance the proposed endeavor.”
“The Petitioner has not provided evidence that he has received any funding for his future proposed endeavor.”
“the Google Scholar data he presented reflects a total of only 28 citations of his work”
“the Petitioner has not provided evidence of interest of potential customers, users, investors, or other relevant entities or individuals in his proposed endeavor.”
AAO decision text
Prong 3 — balance of factorsnot established
“he has not established that it would be impractical to obtain a labor certification with the... as his future employer.”
“the record does not establish that the United States would still benefit from the Petitioner's contributions even assuming other qualified U.S. workers are available.”
“the Petitioner has not established that the national interest in his contributions is sufficiently urgent to warrant forgoing the labor certification process.”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- recommendation letter · credited
- citations publications · discounted
“the Google Scholar data he presented reflects a total of only 28 citations of his work”
AAO decision text - funding · discounted
“the record does not include evidence establishing that the Petitioner was the primary awardee or recipient of the grant funding”
AAO decision text - resume experience · discounted
“The record does not include supporting documentation of his duties as an instructor and a software engineer”
AAO decision text - degree · discounted
“The Petitioner's present level of education does not currently support the claim that he is well-positioned to advance the proposed endeavor.”
AAO decision text
All 6 evidence items
- other · discounted
“the Petitioner has provided inconsistent information on where he would engage in his proposed endeavor”
AAO decision text
Where this case turned
- Citations insufficient · p2 — citation counts without qualitative account of impact
- Education alone insufficient · p2 — degrees offered as positioning — credentials are not a track record
- Funding absent · p2 — no documented funding or resources behind the plan
- No progress evidence · p2 — no documented movement toward the endeavor since filing
- Record of success insufficient · p2 — a claimed track record the documents do not establish
- Urgency not established · p3 — no reason shown why the benefit cannot wait for labour certification
- U.S. worker availability · p3 — the impracticality of a labour-market test was asserted, not established
271coded 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 reversed SCOPS on prong one (finding national importance established) but withdrew SCOPS' unexplained finding on prong two, and despite finding prong two dispositive, proceeded to also analyze and reject prong three for completeness.
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
- Flores v. Garland
- INA 203(b)(2)
Cases in adjacent profiles
- The Petitioner, a senior principal biostatistician, proposes to develop innovative statistical and machine-learning meth
- The Petitioner proposed to use advanced deep learning and machine learning models to create efficient, safe, and well-pe
- The Petitioner proposes to advance machine learning methods for the design and optimization of advanced metamaterials an
- The Petitioner, a postdoctoral chemist, proposed to continue developing high-performance materials and novel synthetic m
- The Petitioner proposes to design novel sensor data processing methods and machine learning algorithms for smart wearabl