NIW Bearings
dismissedMAR122025_07B52032025-03-12 · 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 expand his Florida-based IT consulting company, offering AI, blockchain, and IT solutions to businesses, as a computer network architect and entrepreneur.

Field: information technology / AI / computer network architecture · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

EB-2 threshold — addressed

AAO noted ambiguity in whether the foreign degree equated to a U.S. bachelor's degree, but reserved decision on this issue because the national importance issue was dispositive.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“we agree with the Director's determination that the Petitioner did not establish the national importance of his proposed endeavor”
“the Petitioner's financial projections are merely projections and unsupported by any independent, corroborating evidence, such as contracts or letters of intent”
“The business plan does not sufficiently detail the basis for the revenue projections or explain how the revenue projections will be realized”
“the Petitioner's background and experience, however commendable, do not provide evidence of the national importance of his proposed endeavor”
“we are unable to conclude that his endeavor will have substantial positive effects, particularly in an economically depressed area, to reach the level of national importance”
“The reports provide only general information. The key factor is the Petitioner's specific endeavor.”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

  • business plan · discounted
    “the Petitioner's financial projections are merely projections and unsupported by any independent, corroborating evidence”
    AAO decision text
  • resume experience · discounted
    “the Petitioner's background and experience, however commendable, do not provide evidence of the national importance of his proposed endeavor”
    AAO decision text
  • other · discounted
    “The reports provide only general information. The key factor is the Petitioner's specific endeavor.”
    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
  • 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
  • Local, not national scope · p1 — impact confined to clients / a region
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 flagged inconsistencies in the record undermining the business plan's credibility: the company's principal address was not actually located in a current HUBZone, and Florida corporate records showed a co-manager despite the Petitioner's claim of sole ownership. The Petitioner also raised an unsuccessful argument that the Director applied a heightened standard of proof rather than preponderance of the evidence.

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
  • Matter of E-M-

Cases in adjacent profiles

← Back to the case explorer