The Petitioner, a research analyst for a state juvenile justice department, proposed to conduct research on recidivism and assault factors in juvenile detention facilities, developing classification tools and policy recommendations, with claimed potential extension to other states.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“the record does not show that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor stands to sufficiently extend beyond I I to impact the social services field or societal welfare more broadly at a level commensurate with national importance”

“The Petitioner, however, has not provided evidence from or other state agencies outside of to corroborate his claims relating to the potential prospective impact of his proposed endeavor”

“the record does not show that benefits to the U.S. regional or national economy resulting from his projects would reach the level of "substantial positive economic effects" contemplated by Dhanasar”

“the relevant question is not the importance of the field, industry, or profession in which the individual will work; instead, we focus on the "the specific endeavor that the foreign national proposes to undertake"”

“The letters of support froml land I mainly focus on the Petitioner's skills, knowledge, and past work experience rather than the national importance of his proposed endeavor”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

• recommendation letter · discounted

  “he does not discuss the broader implications of the Petitioner's proposed endeavor beyond”

  AAO decision text
• other · discounted

  “These two reports, however, do not demonstrate the Petitioner's proposed endeavor's prospective impact on a broader scale”

  AAO decision text
• resume experience · discounted

  “The Petitioner's skills, knowledge, and prior work in his field relate to the second prong of the Dhanasar framework”

  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 not independent · p1 — letters come from employers and close collaborators, not independent experts
• Local, not national scope · p1 — impact confined to clients / a region

Notable

Petitioner attempted to rely on the vacated NYSDOT framework on appeal, which AAO explicitly rejected, noting Dhanasar vacated NYSDOT in December 2016. AAO also noted the appellate brief merely repeated RFE-response information without identifying error in the Director's decision.

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.

• Poursina v. USCIS

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