NIW Bearings
dismissedMAR182025_04B52032025-03-18 · 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, a certified public accountant, proposed to operate a financial consulting firm in Texas advising businesses, educational institutions, and community organizations on compliance, audits, financial strategy, and risk management.

Field: accounting / financial consulting · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“the matter here is not whether accounting, auditing, or financial services are nationally important”
“the Petitioner did not present sufficient supporting evidence to corroborate the assertions and figures”
“did not demonstrate the relevance of these numbers and show that such future staffing levels would provide substantial economic benefits”
“the record does not show through supporting documentation how her endeavor sufficiently extends beyond her prospective clients and employees”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

  • recommendation letter · discounted
    “the Petitioner's knowledge, skills, and abilities relate to the second prong of the Dhanasar framework”
    AAO decision text
  • business plan · discounted
    “the Petitioner did not present sufficient supporting evidence to corroborate the assertions and figures”
    AAO decision text
  • resume experience · discounted
    “the Petitioner's knowledge, skills, and abilities relate to the second prong of the Dhanasar framework”
    AAO decision text
  • other · discounted
    “the matter here is not whether accounting, auditing, or financial services are nationally important”
    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
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

Footnote cites Flores v. Garland (5th Cir. 2023) to confirm NIW grant/denial is discretionary, joining several circuits; AAO explicitly separates substantial merit (conceded) from national importance (failed) analysis.

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)

What this case teaches

Analyst reading of the decision text.

Decisive factor

Her rebuttal to the teacher analogy, that consulting touches many businesses across industries, had no documentary support tracing impact past her prospective clients; the modest, uncorroborated business-plan figures ended prong one.

Transferable lesson

Claiming your services ripple across industries is the teacher analogy restated unless documents trace the ripple; a best case of half a million in profit argues against national scale.

Endeavor framing

moderate

National-importance theory

economic_job_creation · economic_growth_generic · geographic_or_shortage_area

Evidence targeting

person_focused

Cases in adjacent profiles

← Back to the case explorer