dismissedNOV202025_01B52032025-11-20 · 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 rigging artist in the entertainment industry, proposed to design technology-supported characters and scenes for film/TV, continue working for his current employer, and establish his own computer graphic design studio while mentoring aspiring rigging artists.

Field: rigging design / animation for film and television · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

EB-2 threshold — addressed

SCOPS found and AAO agreed Petitioner qualifies as an advanced degree professional based on his MFA in Animation.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“merely working in an important field or profession is insufficient to establish the national importance of the proposed endeavor.”

“the Petitioner has not demonstrated that the specific endeavor he proposes to undertake has significant potential to employ U.S. workers or otherwise offers substantial positive economic effects for the nation.”

“they do not offer persuasive detail concerning the impact of his proposed endeavor or establish how such an impact would extend beyond his employer and its clients.”

AAO decision text

Prong 2 — well positionednot established · dispositive

“the letters do not further elaborate on or sufficiently explain how the Petitioner's work has been utilized in the field or otherwise constitutes a record of success.”

“the record lacks documentation of any progress towards achieving the proposed endeavor, which might include the establishment of the business as a legal entity, registration of the business, securing any necessary funding”

“there is no indication in the record that the Petitioner has successfully gathered interest from potential investors or customers.”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

recommendation letter · discounted
“they do not offer persuasive detail concerning the impact of his proposed endeavor or establish how such an impact would extend beyond his employer and its clients.”
AAO decision text
resume experience · discounted
“the record includes more information about his achievements as a rigging artist than about the prospects of his proposed business.”
AAO decision text
degree · credited
business plan · discounted
“the record lacks documentation of any progress towards achieving the proposed endeavor”
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
Field importance conflated with endeavor · p1 — argues the field matters, not the specific endeavor
Letters conclusory · p1 — letters praise skills in general terms without tracing specific impact
Funding absent · p2 — no documented funding or resources behind the plan
Letters conclusory · p2 — letters praise skills in general terms without tracing specific impact
No progress evidence · p2 — no documented movement toward the endeavor since filing
Record of success insufficient · p2 — a claimed track record the documents do not establish

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 noted the Petitioner's appeal presented only general disagreement with SCOPS without identifying specific errors, citing Matter of Valencia; AAO nonetheless reviewed the record and reversed SCOPS' favorable second-prong finding, ultimately finding both prongs one and two unmet and reserving the third prong.

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
Matter of L-A-C-

Cases in adjacent profiles

← Back to the case explorer