dismissedMAY142025_07B52032025-05-14 · combined
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 proposed to operate an engineering consulting services company focusing on electrical engineering, electronics, and production processes, which he argued would enhance the nation's energy systems and support environmental and economic goals.
Field: electrical engineering / engineering consulting · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“the record did not demonstrate the prospective impact and national importance of the specific endeavor”
“He again submits industry articles that emphasize the importance of the electrical engineering field, rather than demonstrate the prospective impact of his specific proposed endeavor.”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- media · discounted
“articles emphasize the importance of the electrical engineering field, rather than demonstrate the prospective impact of his specific proposed endeavor”
AAO decision text - motion resubmission · discounted
“the Petitioner generally disagreed with our conclusions and reargued issues already considered in our previous decision”
AAO decision text
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
1,619coded 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
This is a second combined motion to reopen/reconsider following a prior AAO dismissal of both the appeal and a first combined motion; the AAO's review was expressly limited to whether the latest decision contained legal/factual errors, and it found the Petitioner merely reargued prior points without new evidence specific to his endeavor's impact.
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(a)(1)(ii)
- 8 C.F.R. 103.5(a)(2)
- 8 C.F.R. 103.5(a)(3)
- 8 C.F.R. 103.5(a)(4)
- Matter of Coelho
Cases in adjacent profiles
- The Beneficiary proposed to establish an asset investment management and compliance advisory firm in New York offering c
- The Petitioner proposed to develop and commercialize zeolite-based products in the United States, including agricultural
- The Petitioner proposed to operate a medical billing and healthcare revenue cycle management firm in the United States,
- The Petitioner proposed to establish and lead as CEO a cybersecurity and crisis management company in Florida, offering
- The Petitioner proposed to establish and operate an IT consultancy company in Michigan providing cloud migration, cybers