dismissedMAR272025_05B52032025-03-27 · combined · 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 initially proposed to work as a Business Intelligence Analyst/Sustainability and Business Intelligence Consultant producing financial insights via data queries and reporting, then in RFE response described a shifted focus to an Agile Consultant/Technology Project Manager implementing Agile processes within a company.
Field: sustainability and business intelligence / agile technology project management · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“Here, the Petitioner has not identified a specific and consistent proposed endeavor and therefore, has not established new facts overcoming our prior determination and establishing eligibility.”
“We noted that the Petitioner did not offer sufficient information or evidence to demonstrate that the prospective impact of his proposed endeavor rises to the level of national importance”
“the newly submitted industry articles and industry reports all generally discuss business intelligence, data analytics, data in sustainability, and clean energy projects, and do not specifically speak to the Petitioner's specific endeavor”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- other · discounted
“do not specifically speak to the Petitioner's specific endeavor he proposes to undertake”
AAO decision text - motion resubmission · discounted
“he essentially reargues claims of his eligibility for a national interest waiver without pointing to how we erred”
AAO decision text
Where this case turned
- Economic claims unsupported · p1 — job/revenue projections with no corroborating basis
- Endeavor too vague · p1 — described as a job role, not a defined undertaking
- Occupational shortage argument rejected · p1 — argues a labor shortage — the labor-certification question, not Dhanasar
2,501coded 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
The decision centers on a threshold material-change-of-endeavor issue (Matter of Izummi/Katigbak) rather than a fresh prong analysis; the AAO found the petitioner failed to establish new facts overcoming the prior national importance determination and separately failed to identify legal/factual error for reconsideration.
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. 103.5
- Matter of Coelho
- Matter of Izummi
- Matter of Katigbak
- Matter of O-S-G-
Cases in adjacent profiles
- The Petitioner proposed to work as an IT consultant in the United States, providing cybersecurity and digital transforma
- The petitioner proposed to establish his own company providing specialized business consultancy, auditing, and training
- The petitioner proposed to work as a consultant engineer through his own company, specializing in development projects t
- The Petitioner proposed to start a project management consultancy in the United States that would help small and mid-siz
- The Petitioner proposed to establish a legal consultancy in the United States focused on alternative dispute resolution