dismissedMAR202023_01B52032023-03-20 · 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 Petitioner, an electrical engineer with over 17 years of experience in Pakistan, initially proposed to work in the U.S. manufacturing/engineering sector, but later changed course to plan launching his own electrical engineering consulting and services company with multiple regional offices.
Field: electrical engineering · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“The Director determined that the material change by the Petitioner to the proposed endeavor made its national importance and potential prospective impact questionable, and therefore, concluded that he did not demonstrate national importance.”
“Because the Petitioner has not provided consistent information regarding his proposed endeavor, we cannot conclude that his proposed endeavor would have national importance.”
“The information provided by the Petitioner in the response to the Director's NOID did not clarify or provide more specificity to the proposed endeavor as initially described, but rather materially changed its focus.”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- business plan · discounted
“the NOID response presented a new set of facts regarding the proposed endeavor, which is material to eligibility”
AAO decision text - resume experience · discounted
Where this case turned
- Business plan speculative · p1 — projections without a documented basis or steps
- Endeavor too vague · p1 — described as a job role, not a defined undertaking
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 dismissed based on a material-change theory: Petitioner switched from seeking U.S. engineering employment to proposing a new business venture in response to the NOID, which AAO treated as an impermissible material change under Matter of Izummi/Katigbak, undermining consistency needed to establish national importance under prong 1.
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. 103.2(b)(1)
- 8 C.F.R. 103.2(b)(12)
- 8 C.F.R. 103.2(b)(8)
- Matter of Izummi
- Matter of Katigbak
- Matter of L-A-C-
- Poursina v. USCIS
- USCIS Policy Manual F.5(D)(2)
Cases in adjacent profiles
- The Petitioner, a mechanical engineer, proposed to advance thermal management solutions for high-power, compact, and rel
- The Petitioner, a senior engineering program manager specializing in electromechanical systems, proposed to advance moto
- The Petitioner proposed to provide innovative solutions to optimize freight and vessel operations in the U.S. shipping i
- The Petitioner, a sales manager, proposed an endeavor in the United States for which he sought an EB-2 national interest
- The Petitioner proposed to lead a nationwide initiative to develop and implement a standardized materials management mod