NIW Bearings
dismissedMAR182025_01B52032025-03-18 · 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 planned to serve as chief executive of a Florida-based LLC providing customized international trade compliance consulting, including strategic compliance plans, performance analysis, and training programs, serving clients nationwide.

Field: trade compliance consulting · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

EB-2 threshold — addressed

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

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“The Petitioner cites no evidence to support this claim.”
“The record does not establish that the employment of up to 120 individuals is significantly high in the Petitioner's field.”
“The record does not indicate that any of these services are unique, innovative, or otherwise have national or even global implications in the Petitioner's field.”
“Our assessment of national importance does not focus on the importance of a field or sector of the U.S. economy in general, but instead "focuses on the specific endeavor that the foreign national proposes to undertake."”
“J-E-'s assertions do not demonstrate that the work of the Petitioner's company would extend beyond its clients to impact her field more broadly on at a level indicative of national importance.”
“However, working in areas of national interest does not in and of itself establish the national importance of a proposed endeavor.”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

  • business plan · discounted
    “The record does not demonstrate that such profit would result in a substantial positive economic effect”
    AAO decision text
  • recommendation letter · discounted
    “does not demonstrate that the work of the Petitioner's company would extend beyond its clients to impact her field more broadly”
    AAO decision text
  • other · discounted
    “none of the articles discuss the Petitioner's proposed 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
  • 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
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 emphasized that submitted general trade-policy articles were insufficient because they did not discuss the Petitioner's specific proposed endeavor, reinforcing that field-level importance does not establish endeavor-specific national importance.

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)
  • Matter of L-A-C-

Cases in adjacent profiles

← Back to the case explorer