dismissedNOV182024_01B52032024-11-18 · 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 market risk analyst at a financial institution, proposed to develop and enhance market risk models and engage in risk analytics to quantify market risk and safeguard assets within a regulatory framework.
Field: market risk management / risk analytics · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“did not appear to benefit anyone other than his employer and their clients”
“the record does not establish the scope of the Petitioner's work, how it would extend beyond his employer”
“The vague and general statements related to the Petitioner's proposed endeavor are not sufficient to establish that his work rises to the level of national importance.”
“the articles do not specifically refer to the Petitioner or the importance of the Petitioner's specific work within the industry”
“Simply asserting that his work will assist in avoiding an economic collapse is not sufficient to establish national importance.”
“Generalized conclusory statements that do not identify a specific impact in the field have little probative value.”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- media · discounted
“the articles do not specifically refer to the Petitioner or the importance of the Petitioner's specific work within the industry”
AAO decision text - resume experience · discounted
“he has not provided evidence of his employment or current area of responsibility”
AAO decision text
Where this case turned
- Economic claims unsupported · p1 — job/revenue projections with no corroborating basis
- Employer-specific benefit · p1 — "work furthers my company's product" — value accrues to one firm
- 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
2,589coded 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's holding sentence oddly switches pronoun ('her proposed endeavor') despite consistently referring to the petitioner as 'he' throughout, an apparent drafting/OCR error. The decision declined to reach prongs two and three after finding prong one dispositive.
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
- Matter of L-A-C-
Cases in adjacent profiles
- The Petitioner, a mechanical engineer, proposed to advance thermal management solutions for high-power, compact, and rel
- The Petitioner, a senior engineering program manager specializing in electromechanical systems, proposed to advance moto
- The Petitioner proposed to provide innovative solutions to optimize freight and vessel operations in the U.S. shipping i
- The Petitioner, a sales manager, proposed an endeavor in the United States for which he sought an EB-2 national interest
- The Petitioner proposed to lead a nationwide initiative to develop and implement a standardized materials management mod