NIW Bearings
dismissedNOV302023_04B52032023-11-30 · 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, an engineer and drone operator, proposed to work as a consultant promoting and developing novel methods for the use of industrial drones in commercial applications such as construction, agriculture, and telecommunications.

Field: electronics engineering / industrial drone applications · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

EB-2 threshold — addressed

Director found, and AAO did not disturb, that Petitioner qualified as advanced degree professional based on foreign bachelor's degree plus five years progressive experience.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“the impact of the Petitioner's activities stands to extend beyond the Petitioner's clients or employer to impact the field on a level commensurate with national importance”
“the relevant question is not the importance of the industry, field, or profession in which an individual will work”
“the articles and reports do not establish that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor has national importance”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

  • recommendation letter · discounted
    “did not establish that the proposed endeavor would extend beyond the Petitioner and his employer”
    AAO decision text
  • media · discounted
    “relate to drones, the construction industry, and the U.S. economy in general, not to the Petitioner's specific proposed endeavor”
    AAO decision text
  • resume experience · discounted
    “did not establish that the impact of the Petitioner's endeavor would reach beyond the Petitioner's employer or clients to the broader field”
    AAO decision text

Where this case turned

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

AAO rejected Petitioner's argument distinguishing 'proposed endeavor' from 'proposed employment held in furtherance of endeavor,' holding that even if such a distinction exists, national importance still must be assessed by considering how the endeavor is implemented. AAO also rejected the claim that the Director failed to consider all evidence, citing multiple circuit court holdings that adjudicators need not address every piece of evidence individually.

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. 103.2(b)(1)
  • 8 C.F.R. 103.3
  • 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(2)
  • Buletini v. INS
  • Matter of L-A-C-
  • Poursina v. USCIS

Cases in adjacent profiles

← Back to the case explorer