NIW Bearings
dismissedOCT272025_05B52032025-10-27 · 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 proposed to develop and implement a peer-to-peer security model and self-healing mesh network to defend decentralized renewable energy systems (off-grid and microgrid setups) from cyber threats, through his own self-employment venture.

Field: decentralized renewable energy cybersecurity · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

EB-2 threshold — addressed

SCOPS found, and AAO did not disturb, that the petitioner qualified as an advanced degree professional for EB-2 classification.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“the record did not adequately demonstrate that the benefits the Petitioner identified to purportedly flow from his proposed endeavor”
“the record does not adequately demonstrate how realization of $21,200,000 in cyber incident cost avoidance over five years would impact the field nationally”
“it is not clear from the record how this job creation for the proposed endeavor itself would have a substantial prospective positive economic effect”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

  • business plan · discounted
    “the record does not support the benefits... would extend beyond the endeavor itself to have an impact on a level of national importance”
    AAO decision text
  • other · discounted
    “the reports and whitepapers the Petitioner submitted were general in nature”
    AAO decision text

Where this case turned

  • Business plan speculative · p1 — projections without a documented basis or steps
  • Economic claims unsupported · p1 — job/revenue projections with no corroborating basis
  • Local, not national scope · p1 — impact confined to clients / a region
1,358coded 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 argued on appeal that SCOPS applied an improperly heightened standard, relied on the vacated NYSDOT framework, mischaracterized the endeavor as entrepreneurial, and conflated the Dhanasar prongs; the AAO rejected these procedural objections and resolved the appeal solely on prong one, reserving the remaining prongs.

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
  • Flores v. Garland
  • Matter of L-A-C-
  • Matter of Y-B-

Cases in adjacent profiles