dismissedMAY062025_04B52032025-05-06 · appeal
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 market researcher, proposed to continue empirical research on the psychological underpinnings of social groups, norms, and decision-making to generate insights for product user experience and marketing strategies at his employer.
Field: market research · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“the record does not otherwise establish that the proposed endeavor will have the type of broader implications indicative of national importance”
“the record indicates that the proposed endeavor's effects will be primarily confined to his employer and its clients, customers, business partners, and users of its products”
“none of the documents discuss the Petitioner, the specific endeavor he proposes to undertake, and whether the specific endeavor may have national or even global implications within the field of market research”
“the record does not support the conclusion-that his proposal to continue conducting market research for a given employer may have significant potential to employ U.S. workers or other substantial pos1ttve economic effects”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- other · discounted
“none of the documents discuss the Petitioner, the specific endeavor he proposes to undertake, and whether the specific endeavor may have national or even global implications”
AAO decision text
Where this case turned
- Economic claims unsupported · p1 — job/revenue projections with no corroborating basis
- Employer-specific benefit · p1 — "work furthers my company's product" — value accrues to one firm
- Field importance conflated with endeavor · p1 — argues the field matters, not the specific endeavor
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 AAO expressly withdrew SCOPS' finding that the petitioner's change of employer materially altered his proposed endeavor, but still dismissed the appeal solely on national importance grounds, declining to reach prongs two and three under Bagamasbad and Matter of L-A-C-.
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.
- Flores v. Garland
- Matter of L-A-C-
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