dismissedSEP252024_09B52032024-09-25 · 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.

A systems engineer working in aerospace/aviation control systems design and testing sought to continue advancing and innovating in the U.S. aerospace industry, though he described this variously as continuing with his current employer or transferring his skillset to other roles in the field.

Field: aerospace/systems engineering (control systems design and testing) · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“he does not identify which specific technology he intended to research, design, and develop.”

“the record does not show that the benefits resulting from the Petitioner's work would have implications beyond the limited benefits to his prospective employer(s).”

“merely working in an important field is insufficient to establish the national importance of the proposed endeavor.”

“the Petitioner has not provided projected employment numbers and revenue growth contributable to his specific endeavor”

“But Dr. U-S- does not explain how the Petitioner's specific work would broadly impact the field.”

“the Petitioner has not sufficiently established his specific proposed endeavor.”

AAO decision text

Prong 2 — well positionednot established

“we cannot conclude the Petitioner is well-positioned to advance it.”

“there is nothing in the record to establish his employer's interest in employing him beyond the completion of his L-1 visa.”

“he has not clearly indicated his intent to pursue those roles.”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

recommendation letter · discounted
“these also provide little probative value in establishing the nature of the Petitioner's endeavor or its national importance.”
AAO decision text
resume experience · discounted
“the Petitioner's education, experience, skills, and knowledge in isolation are not necessarily sufficient to establish he is well-positioned”
AAO decision text
other · discounted
“The grant of an L-1 visa does not indicate that an individual's work is nationally important or otherwise merits waiving a job offer.”
AAO decision text
media · discounted
“merely working in an important field is insufficient to establish the national importance of the proposed endeavor.”
AAO decision text

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
Letters conclusory · p1 — letters praise skills in general terms without tracing specific impact
Business plan speculative · p2 — projections without a documented basis or steps
No progress evidence · p2 — no documented movement toward the endeavor since filing
Record of success insufficient · p2 — a claimed track record the documents do not establish

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 AAO withdrew the Director's finding that prong 1 was met, illustrating that AAO can revisit prongs the Director found favorable to the petitioner even absent a cross-appeal; the AAO also discounted L-1 visa approval history as irrelevant to national importance, and declined to reach prong 3.

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
Matter of Caron Int'l
Matter of D-R-
Matter of L-A-C-

Cases in adjacent profiles

← Back to the case explorer