The petitioner sought to work as an assistant professor and researcher in the United States studying the economics of carbon cap-and-trade markets and green job creation, including carbon trading in agriculture.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“the Petitioner has not established that his proposed endeavor will have a sufficient economic, cultural, or educational effect that rises to the level of national importance.”

“While this information highlights the importance of the sector itself: it does not show the importance of the Petitioner's contribution to that sector.”

“The focus of both letters is on the Petitioner's past accomplishments which is relevant to the second prong of Dhanasar but does not establish the national importance of the Petitioner's future research or teaching activities.”

AAO decision text

Prong 2 — well positionednot established · dispositive

“the Petitioner has not provided sufficient evidence to establish that he is well-positioned to advance his endeavor.”

“The Petitioner has not provided a sufficient model or plan for conducting his research or shown that he has received interest from businesses, government entities, non-governmental organizations, or academic institutions in fonding or cooperating with his research endeavor.”

“the Petitioner, however, has not sufficiently demonstrated that his published and presented work has served as an impetus for progress in the carbon cap-and-trade market or green job creation field or that it has generated substantial positive discourse in the environmental science or economic community.”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

• recommendation letter · discounted

  “The letter did not provide any concrete examples of how the Petitioner's past research relates to his proposed endeavor”

  AAO decision text
• citations publications · discounted

  “he has not shown that this work renders him well-positioned to advance his proposed research”

  AAO decision text
• business plan · discounted

  “has not provided a sufficient model or plan for conducting his research”

  AAO decision text
• degree · credited

Where this case turned

• Endeavor too vague · p1 — described as a job role, not a defined undertaking
• Field importance conflated with endeavor · p1 — argues the field matters, not the specific endeavor
• Business plan speculative · p2 — projections without a documented basis or steps
• No progress evidence · p2 — no documented movement toward the endeavor since filing
• Record of success insufficient · p2 — a claimed track record the documents do not establish

Notable

AAO used a footnote to cast doubt on the sufficiency of the Petitioner's Nepali three-year bachelor's degree despite not disturbing the underlying EB-2 finding, and separately took administrative notice of 2025 executive orders withdrawing the U.S. from the Paris Climate Agreement and refocusing on traditional fuels to undercut the Petitioner's claim that his cap-and-trade research aligns with current U.S. policy priorities.

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.

• Buletini v. INS
• Flores v. Garland
• Matter of E-M-

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