NIW Bearings
dismissedNOV182024_07B52032024-11-18 · 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 sought to work as a marketing executive or independent marketing consultant, designing multimedia marketing and branding strategies to help U.S. businesses expand, globalize, and localize.

Field: marketing/business development · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

EB-2 threshold — addressed

AAO agreed with the Director that the Petitioner qualifies as an advanced degree professional.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“did not offer specific information and evidence to corroborate his assertions that the prospective impact of continuing his work and expanding his knowledge and expertise to companies rises to the level of national importance.”
“the impact of the proposed endeavor would reach beyond his "clients at a business where he intends to work."”
“a labor shortage is insufficient to satisfy his burden to demonstrate his endeavor is of national importance.”
“this letter speaks to the importance of the marketing and advertising fields but not the Petitioner's actual proposed endeavor as required under prong one of the Dhanasar framework.”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

  • recommendation letter · discounted
    “this letter speaks to the importance of the marketing and advertising fields but not the Petitioner's actual proposed endeavor”
    AAO decision text
  • media · discounted
    “these documents do not corroborate the Petitioner's assertions”
    AAO decision text

Where this case turned

  • 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
  • Occupational shortage argument rejected · p1 — argues a labor shortage — the labor-certification question, not Dhanasar
2,501coded 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 disagreed with the Director's finding that the endeavor lacked substantial merit (finding it was indeed business/marketing-related) but agreed the Petitioner failed to show national importance, making prong one dispositive; prongs two and three were expressly reserved.

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
  • INA 203(b)(2)
  • Matter of Caron Int'l
  • Matter of D-R-
  • Matter of L-A-C-
  • USCIS Policy Manual F.5(D)(1)

What this case teaches

Analyst reading of the decision text.

Decisive factor

Evidence (articles, reports, expert letter) addressed the marketing field generally and petitioner's credentials, not the specific proposed endeavor's prospective national-level impact, failing prong one.

Transferable lesson

Directly connect corroborating evidence—expert letters, reports, data—to the specific proposed endeavor's projected national-scale impact, not general field significance or personal track record.

Endeavor framing

moderate

National-importance theory

economic_job_creation · economic_growth_generic · us_competitiveness · geographic_or_shortage_area

Evidence targeting

person_focused

Cases in adjacent profiles

← Back to the case explorer