dismissedNOV042024_04B52032024-11-04 · appeal · 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, an architect, planned to start a company in Florida offering architectural consulting services focused on sustainable design and affordable housing for low- and medium-income individuals.
Field: architecture · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — addressed
Director and AAO agreed Petitioner established eligibility for underlying EB-2 classification as an advanced degree professional; only the waiver prongs were at issue.
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“Merely working in an important field is insufficient to establish the national importance of the proposed endeavor without evidence documenting the "potential prospective impact" of a petitioner's work.”
“The record does not contain sufficient evidence to conclude that the effects of the Petitioner's specific endeavor will rise to the level of national importance.”
“Although the support letters in the record detail the Petitioner's past accomplishments and expertise, they do not offer evidence of the potential of her proposed endeavor to impact her field more broadly.”
“However, the record does not sufficiently detail the basis for the Petitioner's financial and staffing projections.”
“We additionally acknowledge the letters from potential investors, but they do not include details regarding the financial commitment or other arrangements they intend to make.”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- business plan · discounted
“the record does not sufficiently detail the basis for the Petitioner's financial and staffing projections”
AAO decision text - recommendation letter · discounted
“they do not offer evidence of the potential of her proposed endeavor to impact her field more broadly”
AAO decision text - funding · discounted
“they do not include details regarding the financial commitment or other arrangements they intend to make”
AAO decision text - resume experience · ignored
- motion resubmission · discounted
“the Petitioner does not clarify how these documents establish her eligibility for the national interest waiver as claimed on appeal”
AAO decision text
Where this case turned
- Business plan speculative · p1 — projections without a documented basis or steps
- Economic claims unsupported · p1 — job/revenue projections with no corroborating basis
- Field importance conflated with endeavor · p1 — argues the field matters, not the specific endeavor
- Letters conclusory · p1 — letters praise skills in general terms without tracing specific impact
1,312coded 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
AAO relies on Flores v. Garland (5th Cir. 2023) to reaffirm discretionary nature of NIW denials; case turns entirely on prong 1's national importance, with prongs 2 and 3 expressly reserved as unnecessary under Bagamasbad.
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. 103.3
- 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(2)
- Flores v. Garland
- INA 203(b)(2)
- Matter of L-A-C-
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