NIW Bearings
dismissedAPR292026_06B52032026-04-29 · appeal · SCOPS 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 proposed to operate a company providing occupational health and safety training and consultancy services—including leadership training, risk assessment, regulatory compliance, and behavior-based safety culture development—to small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in the United States.

Field: occupational health and safety consulting · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

Prong 1 — national importancenot established

“it is not the overall importance of the industry, field, or profession in which an individual intends to work that we consider in evaluating the endeavor, but the particular venture the individual will undertake.”
“The Petitioner has not provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate that his company's services would result in the far-reaching outcomes he envisions.”
“the business plan does not explain how these forecasts were calculated or adequately clarify how these projections will be realized.”
“The Petitioner has not provided independent evidence or otherwise explained how his business would create jobs at a level that would have a significant impact in a region or have a prospective national impact.”
“It is not clear how a business of the size and scope described in the business plan would have national or global implications.”

AAO decision text

Prong 2 — well positionednot established

“the business plan provides a generic approach that could apply to almost any new business offering services related to safety consultancy and training.”
“the business plan does not include an objective source or basis for its sales forecasts.”
“It is not clear how his education and experience demonstrate expertise as either a business administrator or entrepreneur.”
“letters of support attest to the Petitioner's past employment in the field and his knowledge and skills. This documentation, however, is not corroborated by evidence that the Petitioner is well positioned to operate a consultancy company.”
“The record does not include such evidence. The record includes letters from business entities expressing interest in the Petitioner's company's services, but they are not accompanied by any evidence of commitment.”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

  • business plan · discounted
    “the business plan provides a generic approach that could apply to almost any new business offering services related to safety consultancy and training.”
    AAO decision text
  • recommendation letter · discounted
    “it does not discuss any broad implications that his business will have for the field or for the SMEs who utilize his services.”
    AAO decision text
  • other · discounted
    “these webpages include only generalized references to his company's services; they do not contain information about specific services provided or specific accomplishments.”
    AAO decision text
  • resume experience · discounted
    “This documentation, however, is not corroborated by evidence that the Petitioner is well positioned to operate a consultancy company offering services at the scale he has described.”
    AAO decision text
  • certification membership · discounted
    “It is not clear how his education and experience demonstrate expertise as either a business administrator or entrepreneur.”
    AAO decision text
All 6 evidence items
  • other · discounted
    “they are not accompanied by any evidence of commitment, and it is not clear what significance this interest has in demonstrating that the Petitioner is well positioned.”
    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
  • Business plan speculative · p2 — projections without a documented basis or steps
  • Funding absent · p2 — no documented funding or resources behind the plan
  • Letters conclusory · p2 — letters praise skills in general terms without tracing specific impact
  • 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
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

AAO withdrew SCOPS' favorable prong-1 finding (national importance) and substituted its own adverse determination, while agreeing with SCOPS on prong-2 failure; both prongs 1 and 2 were found dispositive together, with prong 3 expressly reserved. The Petitioner also owns a separate luxury design/construction LLC, and the AAO flagged the unresolved conflict between managing that existing business and leading the proposed occupational health and safety consultancy at national scale.

What this case teaches

Analyst reading of the decision text.

Decisive factor

Business plan and evidence remained generic and speculative, failing to show either broader field/economic impact at national scale or concrete progress/positioning to execute the venture.

Transferable lesson

Support entrepreneurial NIW claims with detailed, evidence-backed plans showing specific mechanisms, quantifiable scale, and concrete progress—not generic business-plan boilerplate.

Endeavor framing

vague

National-importance theory

economic_job_creation · economic_growth_generic · public_health

Evidence targeting

person_focused

Cases in adjacent profiles

← Back to the case explorer