NIW Bearings
dismissedSEP182024_03B52032024-09-18 · 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, an economist working as an economic policy advisor at an international financial institution, proposed to continue advising member countries on fiscal, monetary, financial-sector, and structural policies.

Field: economics / international finance policy · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

EB-2 threshold — addressed

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

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“the Petitioner's proposed endeavor appears to be limited to the confines of his existing employment”
“we find that the Petitioner's reliance on the importance of the goals his endeavor seeks to address is misplaced”
“The overall importance of an employer does not by itself establish the national importance of a petitioner's endeavor.”
“While the Petitioner claims that his endeavor promotes U.S. interests, he has not submitted documentary evidence to corroborate this claim.”
“the record does not contain sufficient evidence to conclude that the effects of his endeavor will rise to the level of national importance”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

  • recommendation letter · discounted
    “they outline the contributions he has made to his current employer and his academic and professional background”
    AAO decision text
  • citations publications · discounted
    “do not offer evidence of how his work has impacted his field more broadly such that it would rise to the level of national importance”
    AAO decision text
  • resume experience · discounted
    “they outline the contributions he has made to his current employer and his academic and professional background”
    AAO decision text
  • certification membership · discounted
    “the submitted evidence does not establish that his activities or the scope of the groups in which he participates have national reach”
    AAO decision text
  • motion resubmission · ignored

Where this case turned

  • 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
  • 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
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 Petitioner appears to work for an international financial institution (name redacted throughout as '(b)(6)'), likely the IMF, given references to an Executive Board representing member countries; the AAO emphasized that reliance on the importance of that institution's mission, rather than the Petitioner's own specific advisory work, could not establish national importance.

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. 204.5(k)(2)
  • Flores v. Garland
  • Matter of L-A-C-
  • USCIS Policy Manual F.5(D)(1)

Cases in adjacent profiles

← Back to the case explorer