NIW Bearings
dismissedOCT212024_02B52032024-10-21 · 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 fashion communication specialist, proposed to partner with small and start-up businesses in the United States to improve their reputation, presence, and economic growth through specialized communication and marketing strategies.

Field: fashion communication / marketing · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

EB-2 threshold — not met

The academic evaluation claiming a foreign bachelor's degree equivalency was not supported by the transcript, which showed only three years of coursework limited to the area of concentration, contrasting with the typical four-year U.S. baccalaureate.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“he has not described how his fashion communication specialist work with start-up and small businesses will have a broader impact on his field or any other industries beyond the individual business partnerships and clients he intends to serve”
“merely working in an important field or industry is insufficient to establish the national importance of a proposed endeavor”
“the opinion speculates on positive benefits that may arise from the Petitioner's proposed endeavor, instead of detailing how the endeavor would specifically accomplish the goals”
“Simply showing that his work would support an important industry with a need for qualified professionals is not sufficient to meet the "national importance" requirement”
“he has not offered sufficient, specific evidence regarding any projected impact directly attributable to his future work”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

  • degree · discounted
    “the evaluation is not in accord with the evidence in the record”
    AAO decision text
  • recommendation letter · discounted
    “the letters the Petitioner submitted do not discuss the Petitioner's endeavor or specific prospective impact”
    AAO decision text
  • media · discounted
    “the article focuses on fashion marketing impacting individual businesses' brands, instead of the Petitioner's work impacting the field more broadly”
    AAO decision text
  • other · discounted
    “The opinion relies on the Petitioner's experience to provide generalizations about typical business activity”
    AAO decision text
  • resume experience · discounted
    “his professional knowledge and experience relate to the second prong of the Dhanasar framework”
    AAO decision text

Where this case turned

  • Economic claims unsupported · p1 — job/revenue projections with no corroborating basis
  • Endeavor too vague · p1 — described as a job role, not a defined undertaking
  • Letters conclusory · p1 — letters praise skills in general terms without tracing specific impact
  • Local, not national scope · p1 — impact confined to clients / a region
  • Occupational shortage argument rejected · p1 — argues a labor shortage — the labor-certification question, not Dhanasar
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

The AAO found the Petitioner failed both the threshold EB-2 advanced-degree classification (due to a transcript/evaluation mismatch and only three years of foreign coursework) and dispositive prong 1 national importance; it declined 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
  • Matter of Caron Int'l
  • Matter of D-R-
  • Matter of E-M-
  • Matter of L-A-C-

Cases in adjacent profiles

← Back to the case explorer