NIW Bearings
dismissedNOV082023_06B52032023-11-08 · 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, a Brazilian-trained lawyer, proposed to establish and manage her own legal consulting firm in Massachusetts, providing legal advisory and paralegal services to U.S. businesses, particularly those dealing with Brazil and Latin America.

Field: legal consulting services · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

EB-2 threshold — addressed

Director and AAO agree Petitioner qualifies for EB-2 as an advanced degree professional based on foreign bachelor's equivalent and progressive work experience.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“the relevant question is not the importance of the industry or profession in which the individual will work”
“the Petitioner has not offered sufficient evidence that her business, which had not yet been incorporated or secured physical premises, will have offices in one or more HUBZones”
“the Petitioner has not established that this addition to the workforce in any of the claimed HUBZone regions would be of sufficient significance to rise to the level of national importance”
“she did not provide specific plans, projections of indirect economic benefits, or other sufficient evidence to explain how her company's activities will have broader implications”
“A determination regarding the claimed national importance of a specific proposed endeavor generally cannot be inferred based on the Petitioner's past achievements”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

  • business plan · discounted
    “she has not established that this addition to the workforce in any of the claimed HUBZone regions would be of sufficient significance”
    AAO decision text
  • recommendation letter · discounted
    “much of the content of the expert opinion letter lacked relevance and probative value with respect to the national importance”
    AAO decision text
  • resume experience · discounted
    “the Petitioner's expertise acquired through her academic and professional career relates to the second prong of the Dhanasar framework”
    AAO decision text
  • other · discounted
    “the Petitioner's intent to work in this field alone is not sufficient to establish the national importance of her proposed endeavor”
    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
  • Local, not national scope · p1 — impact confined to clients / a region
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 focused heavily on the Petitioner's claimed HUBZone-based economic impact argument, finding the analogy between SBA HUBZone designation and 'economically depressed area' unsupported, and that the business had not even been incorporated yet.

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)
  • Matter of Caron Int'l
  • Matter of D-R-
  • Matter of L-A-C-
  • Poursina v. USCIS

Cases in adjacent profiles

← Back to the case explorer