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 instructional coordinator, proposed to create and implement a virtual reality tool/technology plan for use in teaching to enhance student engagement and learning outcomes.
Field: education / instructional technology (virtual reality) · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — addressed
Director found Petitioner qualifies as an advanced degree professional; not disputed on motion.
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“the technology plan supplement does not elaborate on how the proposed endeavor may have national or even global implications within the field of education”
“the technology plan supplement does not address how the proposed endeavor may have significant potential to employ U.S. workers or other substantial positive economic effects”
“very little specific information about the Petitioner's proposed endeavor”
“information about a prior project in which the Petitioner participated does not inform how the specific, prospective endeavor she proposes to undertake may have national importance”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- business plan · discounted
“does not address how the potential prospective impact of the specific endeavor ... may have the type of broader implications indicative of national importance”
AAO decision text - recommendation letter · discounted
“very little specific information about the Petitioner's proposed endeavor”
AAO decision text - motion resubmission · discounted
“quoting verbatim assertions she already made in the record”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“do not identify the Petitioner or the specific endeavor she proposes to undertake”
AAO decision text
Where this case turned
- Business plan speculative · p1 — projections without a documented basis or steps
- Endeavor too vague · p1 — described as a job role, not a defined undertaking
- Letters conclusory · p1 — letters praise skills in general terms without tracing specific impact
Notable
This is the Petitioner's second post-appeal combined motion; AAO incorporates prior appeal and motion decisions by reference and finds new evidence (a technology plan supplement and reiterated letters/prior-project information) immaterial to the dispositive national importance issue under Dhanasar prong one.
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
- Matter of O-S-G-
Cases in adjacent profiles
- The Petitioner, an assistant professor of Arabic, proposed to continue teaching Levantine-Modern Standard Arabic to U.S.
- The Petitioner, a secondary school teacher, proposed to develop and implement an open educational resource program to ex
- The Petitioner proposed to establish a consulting company in Missouri to design and implement a nationally adaptable tea
- The Petitioner, an arts, drama, and music teacher and entrepreneur, sought EB-2 classification as an individual of excep
- The petitioner, a mathematics teacher with 17 years of experience, proposed to operate a company offering online math tu