dismissedSEP032026_02B52032026-09-03 · 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.

To advance sustainable architecture and urban design through energy-efficient public and educational building projects and master planning for cultural institutions.

Field: sustainable architecture and urban design · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

EB-2 threshold — addressed

“these letters do not support their conclusory statements with supporting information material to the issue”

“P-L- focuses on the local benefits of the Petitioner's work.”

“the Petitioner has not demonstrated that his proposed endeavor extends beyond his routine employment duties”

“without evidence regarding any projected U.S. economic impact or job creation directly attributable to his future work, as opposed to his employer”

AAO decision text

recommendation letter · discounted
“they do not offer persuasive detail concerning the impact of his proposed endeavor”
AAO decision text
degree · credited

Economic claims unsupported · p1 — job/revenue projections with no corroborating basis
Employer-specific benefit · p1 — "work furthers my company's product" — value accrues to one firm
Letters conclusory · p1 — letters praise skills in general terms without tracing specific impact
Local, not national scope · p1 — impact confined to clients / a region

2,589coded 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 →

From the doctrinal survivor set — 187 authority tests across 47 distinct authorities cleared the differential-lift gates. Only those appear here.