dismissedOCT312024_01B52032024-10-31 · appeal · Nebraska 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 proposed to work as a research economist and professor, and for government agencies, applying her field training and experience to public policy and advocacy for low-income communities.
Field: economics · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — addressed
Director and AAO agreed Petitioner qualified for EB-2 classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree.
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“merely working in an important field or profession is insufficient to establish the national importance of the proposed endeavor.”
“while we acknowledge that the field of economics is important, this fact is insufficient to establish the national importance of her proposed endeavor.”
“The evidence does not adequately demonstrate how the Petitioner's research paper on . . . exerted national, or even global, impact to her field”
“the letters of recommendation do not offer persuasive detail concerning the impact of her proposed endeavor . . . and how it would extend beyond her employer”
“she has not persuasively explained . . . how her proposed work would have the national or global implications for the metropolitan cities or broader implications as she claims, beyond her employer”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- recommendation letter · discounted
“the letters of recommendation do not offer persuasive detail concerning the impact of her proposed endeavor”
AAO decision text - citations publications · discounted
“The evidence does not adequately demonstrate how the Petitioner's research paper . . . exerted national, or even global, impact”
AAO decision text
Where this case turned
- 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
- Letters conclusory · p1 — letters praise skills in general terms without tracing specific impact
- Letters not independent · p1 — letters come from employers and close collaborators, not independent experts
- Local, not national scope · p1 — impact confined to clients / a region
1,581coded 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
Petitioner cited a Presidential executive order on equity as evidence of national importance, which the AAO did not find persuasive; AAO reserved prongs two and three entirely after dispositive failure on prong one.
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 L-A-C-
Cases in adjacent profiles
- The Petitioner, a senior principal biostatistician, proposes to develop innovative statistical and machine-learning meth
- The Petitioner proposed to use advanced deep learning and machine learning models to create efficient, safe, and well-pe
- The Petitioner proposes to advance machine learning methods for the design and optimization of advanced metamaterials an
- The Petitioner, a postdoctoral chemist, proposed to continue developing high-performance materials and novel synthetic m
- The Petitioner proposes to design novel sensor data processing methods and machine learning algorithms for smart wearabl