dismissedAUG262026_02B52032026-08-26 · appeal
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.
Develop Earth system and ecosystem models incorporating soil microbial mechanisms to study carbon and nutrient cycling under climate change and improve greenhouse gas emission predictions for mitigation strategy.
Field: ecology / Earth system and ecosystem modeling · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — addressed
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“the Petitioner improperly relies upon the importance of the industry through the articles and reports in the record”
“the Petitioner does not provide evidence to support her intended economic impact”
“the focus is on the impact of her prior work; not the prospective impact of her proposed endeavor”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- other · discounted
“While the articles demonstrate challenges in the field, they do not establish the proposed endeavor's impact on them.”
AAO decision text - recommendation letter · discounted
“The letters do not speak of the future projects the Petitioner sets forth in her proposed endeavor statement.”
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
- Letters conclusory · p1 — letters praise skills in general terms without tracing specific impact
2,589coded 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 acknowledged USCIS erred by using prong-2 language (whether her work had been 'adopted as a standard') in its prong-1 analysis, yet affirmed. Articles cited in the endeavor statement to support economic impact were not actually in the record. Expert letters addressed only prior modeling work, not the proposed projects.
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
- 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(2)
- Flores v. Garland
Cases in adjacent profiles
- The Petitioner, a senior principal biostatistician, proposes to develop innovative statistical and machine-learning meth
- The Petitioner proposed to use advanced deep learning and machine learning models to create efficient, safe, and well-pe
- The Petitioner proposes to advance machine learning methods for the design and optimization of advanced metamaterials an
- The Petitioner, a postdoctoral chemist, proposed to continue developing high-performance materials and novel synthetic m
- The Petitioner proposes to design novel sensor data processing methods and machine learning algorithms for smart wearabl