NIW Bearings
dismissedMAR122025_04B52032025-03-12 · 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 sought to develop a private equity, hedge fund, and financial planning advice firm in Florida providing private equity capital, financial planning advice, business plan production, and financial assessment and consulting.

Field: finance / financial management · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

EB-2 threshold — addressed

Director found, and AAO agreed, Petitioner qualified as an advanced degree professional based on bachelor's degree and over five years of progressive experience.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“The Petitioner has not established that his proposed endeavor would sufficiently extend beyond his company's clients to impact his field more broadly at a level commensurate with national importance.”
“The Petitioner discusses the role of financial managers, but does not cite any evidence to support his claim.”
“Although they attest to the Petitioner's skills and accomplishments, M-C-F-, A-L-, F-B-M- and A-L-F- do not discuss his proposed endeavor.”
“These articles and reports do not support the Petitioner's claim, as none of them discuss the Petitioner's proposed endeavor.”
“Our assessment of national importance does not focus on the importance of a field or occupation in general, but instead "focuses on the specific endeavor that the foreign national proposes to undertake."”
“The record does not show that the employment of up to 50 people, even in an economically depressed area, is significantly high in the financial industry”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

  • business plan · discounted
    “does not indicate this income would have a substantial positive economic impact in an industry the business plan states is worth $57.2 billion dollars”
    AAO decision text
  • recommendation letter · discounted
    “do not discuss his proposed endeavor”
    AAO decision text
  • other · discounted
    “none of them discuss the Petitioner's proposed endeavor”
    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
  • Letters conclusory · p1 — letters praise skills in general terms without tracing specific impact
  • Letters not independent · p1 — letters come from employers and close collaborators, not independent experts
  • Local, not national scope · p1 — impact confined to clients / a region
  • Occupational shortage argument rejected · p1 — argues a labor shortage — the labor-certification question, not Dhanasar
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 cites Flores v. Garland (5th Cir. 2023) in a footnote regarding the discretionary nature of NIW grants, joining several other circuits.

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 L-A-C-

Cases in adjacent profiles

← Back to the case explorer