dismissedNOV182024_09B52032024-11-18 · 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.
A biostatistician proposed to develop predictive statistical models and research strategies addressing COVID-19 mortality risk, childhood obesity prevention, and early diagnosis of pediatric celiac disease, including three specific studies at Texas institutions.
Field: biostatistics · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — addressed
Director found Petitioner qualified as advanced-degree professional; not disputed on appeal.
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“he has not provided independent objective evidence demonstrating how these projects would take place, such as letters from potential partners or funders”
“the testimonial evidence in the record, such as the recommendation letters, does not analyze the Petitioner's specific proposed endeavor or offer evidence of its impact”
“the Petitioner's arguments on appeal appear to focus on the national importance of the subject matter of the Petitioner's endeavor, rather than of the endeavor itself”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- recommendation letter · discounted
“does not analyze the Petitioner's specific proposed endeavor or offer evidence of its impact”
AAO decision text - business plan · discounted
“he has not provided independent objective evidence demonstrating how these projects would take place”
AAO decision text - citations publications · ignored
- resume experience · ignored
- certification membership · ignored
Where this case turned
- 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
- Letters not independent · p1 — letters come from employers and close collaborators, not independent experts
1,619coded 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 acknowledged two Director errors (improperly requiring economic-impact evidence and mischaracterizing Petitioner's occupation as researcher rather than biostatistician) but still dismissed the appeal on national importance grounds, declining to reach prongs 2 and 3.
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 Petitioner, a senior principal biostatistician, proposes to develop innovative statistical and machine-learning meth
- The Petitioner proposed to use advanced deep learning and machine learning models to create efficient, safe, and well-pe
- The Petitioner proposes to advance machine learning methods for the design and optimization of advanced metamaterials an
- The Petitioner, a postdoctoral chemist, proposed to continue developing high-performance materials and novel synthetic m
- The Petitioner proposes to design novel sensor data processing methods and machine learning algorithms for smart wearabl