NIW Bearings
dismissedNOV182025_03B52032025-11-18 · appeal

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 tax attorney and researcher, proposed to continue researching international taxation, tax treaties, and their domestic application in China, France, and African countries, including tax incentives for green technology and sustainable infrastructure, while also spending a year as a visiting scholar at a U.S. law school.

Field: international tax law · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

EB-2 threshold — addressed

SCOPS determined, and AAO did not disturb, that the Petitioner qualifies as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree based on a foreign degree equivalent to a U.S. master's.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“SCOPS noted that the Petitioner's reliance on the importance of the field is insufficient to establish that her proposed endeavor is of national importance.”
“Although the Petitioner contends that her plans to disseminate her research and findings through peer-reviewed journals show her endeavor would have broad national impact, beyond her employer, this statement is not supported in the record.”
“The proposed endeavor, as described, and the evidence in the record do not support the Petitioner's assertions that the potential impact of her endeavor extends beyond her employer to have a broader impact in her field or implications rising to a level of national importance.”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

  • citations publications · discounted
    “such previous work mainly relates to whether she is well-positioned to advance her endeavor under Dhanasar's second prong”
    AAO decision text
  • degree · credited

Where this case turned

  • Employer-specific benefit · p1 — "work furthers my company's product" — value accrues to one firm
  • 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
746coded 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

The Petitioner did not submit an appellate brief despite indicating one would follow; the AAO decided the appeal based solely on the basis statement in Form I-290B.

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. 103.5
  • 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(2)
  • Flores v. Garland
  • Matter of E-M-
  • Matter of L-A-C-

Cases in adjacent profiles

← Back to the case explorer