NIW Bearings
dismissedSEP242020_02B52032020-09-24 · 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 HR manager, proposed to continue working as an HR manager/consultant for U.S. companies while also forming her own HR training and consulting company in the United States.

Field: human resources management/consulting · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“we find the record does not show that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor stands to sufficiently extend beyond her potential employers, her company, and clientele to impact the human resources field or U.S. economy more broadly”
“Without sufficient information or evidence regarding any projected U.S. economic impact or job creation attributable to her future work, the record does not show that benefits to the U.S. regional or national economy resulting from the Petitioner's HR management projects would reach the level of "substantial positive economic effects"”
“the relevant question is not the importance of the industry or profession in which the individual will work; instead we focus on the "the specific endeavor that the foreign national proposes to undertake."”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

  • business plan · discounted
    “the record does not show that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor stands to sufficiently extend beyond her potential employers, her company, and clientele”
    AAO decision text
  • other · discounted
    “she has not offered sufficient information and evidence to demonstrate that the prospective impact of her proposed endeavor rises to the level of national importance”
    AAO decision text

Where this case turned

  • Economic claims unsupported · p1 — job/revenue projections with no corroborating basis
  • Field importance conflated with endeavor · p1 — argues the field matters, not the specific endeavor
  • Local, not national scope · p1 — impact confined to clients / a region
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

AAO explicitly noted it was not necessary for the petitioner to have a specific job offer since she sought a waiver, but still considered her list of 26 target positions/companies to characterize the nature of her intended work.

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.

  • Poursina v. USCIS

What this case teaches

Analyst reading of the decision text.

Decisive factor

Petitioner failed to show her endeavor's impact would extend beyond her own employers/clients/company to the HR field or U.S. economy at a nationally significant scale.

Transferable lesson

Support national importance with quantifiable, endeavor-specific evidence of scale/impact (job creation, economic effects), not generic industry articles or personal skill descriptions.

Endeavor framing

vague

National-importance theory

economic_growth_generic · economic_job_creation

Evidence targeting

person_focused

Cases in adjacent profiles

← Back to the case explorer