NIW Bearings
dismissedNOV262024_04B52032024-11-26 · 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 civil construction project director, sought to establish real estate development and construction companies in the U.S., including an affordable housing project in Florida with plans to expand elsewhere.

Field: civil engineering / real estate and construction · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“the statement is supportive of a local impact and the Petitioner fails to explain how the impact will reach the national level”
“the matter here is not whether small businesses are nationally important”
“the letter does not detail how the endeavor would have broader implications for the country outside of Florida”
“the Petitioner did not sufficiently explain or demonstrate how his particular proposed endeavor would have any projected U.S. economic impact or job creation”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

  • other · discounted
    “do not establish the specific endeavor's potential prospective impact”
    AAO decision text
  • recommendation letter · discounted
    “does not detail how the endeavor would have broader implications for the country outside of Florida”
    AAO decision text
  • business plan · discounted
    “the Petitioner's descriptive plans lack information on how the projected employment estimates would utilize a significant population of workers”
    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
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 explicitly states each of the deficiencies discussed constitutes an independent and alternate basis for dismissal, though only prong 1 was substantively analyzed.

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
  • Flores v. Garland
  • INA 203(b)(2)
  • Matter of E-M-

Cases in adjacent profiles

← Back to the case explorer