dismissedMAR132023_02B52032023-03-13 · 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, an IT instructor, sought to continue training students in networking and cybersecurity skills in the U.S., aiming to build IT workforce capacity, close the IT digital divide, and support economic development in underserved communities.
Field: information technology / cybersecurity education · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“he has not sufficiently defined his endeavor to show how his continued role as an IT instructor will have a broader impact of national importance”
“the record here does not establish that the Petitioner's IT instructor role would impact the IT or STEM industry more broadly, as opposed to being limited to the students he teaches”
“he has not demonstrated that his specific proposed endeavor has significant potential to employ U.S. workers or otherwise offer substantial positive economic effects for the U.S.”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- resume experience · discounted
“the evidence demonstrated that the Petitioner is a well-established professional in his field, [but] the record did not show the potential national impact”
AAO decision text - recommendation letter · discounted
- other · discounted
“although the documentation of educational material and resources appeared to be new evidence, the nature of the evidence had not changed”
AAO decision text - motion resubmission · discounted
“the nature of the evidence had not changed”
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
- Local, not national scope · p1 — impact confined to clients / a region
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 analogized directly to Dhanasar itself, noting that the precedent decision's own petitioner's teaching activities were found not nationally important, and applied that reasoning to this Petitioner's similar IT teaching role.
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
- Matter of L-A-C-
- Poursina v. USCIS
Cases in adjacent profiles
- The Petitioner, an assistant professor of Arabic, proposed to continue teaching Levantine-Modern Standard Arabic to U.S.
- The Petitioner, a secondary school teacher, proposed to develop and implement an open educational resource program to ex
- The Petitioner proposed to establish a consulting company in Missouri to design and implement a nationally adaptable tea
- The Petitioner, an arts, drama, and music teacher and entrepreneur, sought EB-2 classification as an individual of excep
- The petitioner, a mathematics teacher with 17 years of experience, proposed to operate a company offering online math tu