NIW Bearings
dismissedAPR272023_04B52032023-04-27 · 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 sought to operate a U.S. consultancy advising furniture manufacturers on environmentally sustainable manufacturing processes and sourcing.

Field: environmental sustainability consulting for furniture manufacturing · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

EB-2 threshold — not met

Petitioner did not show five years of progressive experience in the specialty of environmental sustainability (only business administration/hospital/sports facility management experience), nor did he meet three of six exceptional ability criteria (only the academic record criterion was satisfied).

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“the record does not show that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor stands to sufficiently extend beyond his clientele to impact the furniture manufacturing industry”
“the Petitioner has not demonstrated that his proposed endeavor has significant potential to employ U.S. workers or otherwise offers substantial positive economic effects for the nation”
“The record, however, does not include documentation of specific projects his company might undertake with manufacturers to demonstrate the plausibility of his endeavor.”
“he has not provided sufficient information and evidence to demonstrate that the prospective impact of his proposed endeavor rises to the level of national importance”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

  • degree · credited
  • resume experience · discounted
    “the record does not contain evidence showing that he has five years of post-baccalaureate progressive experience in the specialty of environmental sustainability”
    AAO decision text
  • certification membership · discounted
    “we deem this issue to be waived, and we will not address this criterion further”
    AAO decision text
  • business plan · discounted
    “does not include documentation of specific projects his company might undertake with manufacturers to demonstrate the plausibility of his endeavor”
    AAO decision text
  • other · discounted
    “the relevant question is not the importance of the industry or profession in which the individual will work”
    AAO decision text
All 6 evidence items
  • contract revenue · discounted
    “do not demonstrate that the benefits to the regional or national economy resulting from the Petitioner's endeavor would reach the level of "substantial positive economic effects"”
    AAO decision text

Where this case turned

  • Business plan speculative · p1 — projections without a documented basis or steps
  • 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
1,312coded 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

Decision rests on two independent bases: failure to establish underlying EB-2 eligibility (neither advanced degree equivalency nor exceptional ability shown) and, even assuming eligibility, failure of Dhanasar prong 1 national importance; AAO expressly declines to reach prongs 2 and 3 as moot. Petitioner also unsuccessfully invoked the Biden-Harris Buy American executive order/proposed rule, which postdated the petition's filing.

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)
  • Matter of Katigbak
  • Matter of L-A-C-
  • Poursina v. USCIS

Cases in adjacent profiles

← Back to the case explorer