NIW Bearings
remandedMAR202019_01B52032019-03-20 · 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 decision is a procedural remand and does not detail the Petitioner's specific proposed endeavor beyond identifying him as a mechanical engineer petitioning for an NIW.

Field: mechanical engineering · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

EB-2 threshold — addressed

The Director found the Petitioner qualified for classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree; this was not disputed.

This record is one of thousands, each coded for the reasons it turned. A placement shows where your profile sits in that record, not what it predicts. See where your profile sits — 90 seconds

Notable

This decision does not reach the merits of any Dhanasar prong. The case involves a petition approved in June 2016 under the NYSDOT framework, which USCIS later sought to revoke via NOIR applying the intervening Dhanasar framework (issued December 2016). The AAO remanded solely on the procedural/legal ground that because the petition was already approved and not pending when Dhanasar issued, the Director must evaluate 'good and sufficient cause' for revocation under the NYSDOT framework that applied at the time of approval, not under Dhanasar. If the Director again seeks to revoke, a new NOIR applying NYSDOT standards must be issued.

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.

  • INA 203(b)(2)
  • Matter of Ho

What this case teaches

Analyst reading of the decision text.

Decisive factor

The petition was approved in June 2016 under NYSDOT, before Dhanasar issued in December 2016, so the Director erred by applying Dhanasar retroactively via NOIR; remand required NYSDOT analysis.

Transferable lesson

When a petition was approved under a prior legal framework, USCIS must evaluate revocation under that same framework, not retroactively apply a later-issued precedent standard.

Endeavor framing

vague

Evidence targeting

mixed

Cases in adjacent profiles