dismissedOCT292024_02B52032024-10-29 · 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 pricing/data analyst, proposed to continue in his current pricing-analyst role while also conducting a wide range of research projects (e.g., fraud detection, pollution mortality prediction, COVID-19 trend forecasting, stock price prediction) and, in his RFE response, added a plan to establish a consulting firm.

Field: data science / predictive analytics · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

EB-2 threshold — addressed

The Director found, and AAO did not dispute, that the Petitioner qualifies as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“He did not clearly describe his proposed endeavor in his initial filing.”

“The Petitioner has not explained logistically how he would act in these various and wide-ranging capacities at the same time”

“The inclusion of consulting is a distinct addition from the initial proposed endeavor as it significantly expands the endeavor outside the original focus.”

“the evidence does not sufficiently demonstrate how the Petitioner's employment with them would affect the data science field more broadly”

“such nebulous plans for research that the Petitioner claims he intends to undertake in the future does not sufficiently describe a specific proposed endeavor”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

business plan · discounted
“nebulous plans for research that the Petitioner claims he intends to undertake in the future does not sufficiently describe a specific proposed endeavor”
AAO decision text
other · discounted
“The articles and reports are also of little evidentiary value as they do not address the Petitioner's specific proposed endeavor”
AAO decision text
recommendation letter · discounted
“he does not address the Petitioner's proposed endeavor or the potential national importance of those research proposals”
AAO decision text
resume experience · discounted
“this type of evidence is more appropriate for the second prong when determining if the petitioner is well-positioned to advance the proposed endeavor”
AAO decision text
certification membership · discounted
“this type of evidence is more appropriate for the second prong when determining if the petitioner is well-positioned to advance the proposed endeavor”
AAO decision text

All 6 evidence items

citations publications · discounted
“points to the Petitioner's past accomplishments and experiences, not the specific endeavor's potential impact in the data analytics 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
Material change of endeavor · p1 — the endeavor described on appeal is not the one filed

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 applied the material-change doctrine from Matter of Izummi to reject the Petitioner's RFE-stage addition of a consulting-firm endeavor and his shift from 'pricing analyst' to 'predictive and data analyst,' invoking Matter of Ho on unresolved discrepancies; it declined to reach prongs 2 and 3 as unnecessary given the dispositive prong 1 failure.

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. 204.5(k)(2)
Matter of Ho
Matter of Izummi
Matter of L-A-C-
USCIS Policy Manual F.5(D)(1)

Cases in adjacent profiles

← Back to the case explorer