The Petitioner, a PhD in learning design and technology, proposed to hold an academic principal-investigator position developing a theoretical model of adaptive scaffolding to improve online and technology-integrated learning, later reframed to include STEM/semiconductor workforce training.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established

“the record did not establish that any educational entity has adopted the results of any of the petitioner's research”

“Any success from the petitioner's endeavor would be limited to her employer and its clients or students.”

“The broad and changing nature of the proposed endeavor does not permit us to conclude that the Petitioner has established the national importance of that endeavor.”

“These statistics show the implications of low health literacy, but they do not show the extent to which the Petitioner's work will alleviate the issue.”

AAO decision text

Prong 2 — well positionednot established · dispositive

“The record does not show that the Petitioner had produced any published work between her return to Purdue in 2022 and the petition's filing date.”

“The capacity in which the Petitioner would perform that research is unclear, as is her progress toward achieving the proposed endeavor.”

“we conclude that the Petitioner has not met her burden of proof to establish, by a preponderance of the evidence, that she is well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor.”

“The Petitioner has not shown prospects of long-term employment at such a university.”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

• recommendation letter · discounted

  “Statements such as those in the quoted letter emphasized the potential impact of the Petitioner's work, rather than documented effects”

  AAO decision text
• citations publications · discounted

  “the Google Scholar printout showing that information also indicates that the Petitioner had not published since 2021”

  AAO decision text
• media · discounted

  “These materials are press releases issued by [University] which do not serve as evidence that the projects attracted attention outside that university.”

  AAO decision text
• funding · discounted

  “The Petitioner notes government fonding of her research, but did not show that she played any role in securing that fonding”

  AAO decision text
• other · discounted

  “these materials do not directly address the existing or potential impact of educational technology”

  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
• Field importance conflated with endeavor · p1 — argues the field matters, not the specific endeavor
• Local, not national scope · p1 — impact confined to clients / a region
• Business plan speculative · p2 — projections without a documented basis or steps
• Citations insufficient · p2 — citation counts without qualitative account of impact
• Letters not independent · p2 — letters come from employers and close collaborators, not independent experts
• 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 emphasized that changes to the proposed endeavor made after the priority date (the shift to semiconductor-workforce training beginning in an August 2025 postdoctoral position) cannot retroactively establish eligibility, citing Matter of Katigbak; AAO disagreed with SCOPS' unelaborated finding that Petitioner was well positioned, reversing that determination.

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. 103.3
• 8 C.F.R. 103.5
• Flores v. Garland
• Matter of Katigbak

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