dismissedFEB022026_06B52032026-02-02 · 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.

The Beneficiary, employed as a human resources partner at a humanitarian non-profit, proposed to continue developing HR strategies (retention, staffing, recruitment programs) for the organization, later reframed on appeal as work intended to be scaled and shared across the humanitarian nonprofit sector.

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

EB-2 threshold — addressed

SCOPS and AAO agreed the Beneficiary is eligible as an advanced degree professional (master's equivalent in HR management).

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“the Petitioner does not sufficiently explain or provide adequate evidence to demonstrate that the Beneficiary's specific endeavor is likely to have an impact that will rise to the level of national importance.”

“a large portion of the Petitioner's assertions rest upon the importance of the field in which the Beneficiary works.”

“this letter describes the Beneficiary's proposed endeavor only within the context of his employment with the Petitioner, and makes no mention of his or his employer's intent to craft human resource strategies applicable to other nonprofit humanitarian organizations.”

“the Petitioner's later assertions concerning the scalability and replicability of the Beneficiary's human resource strategies and models, and thus their potential for broader implications, are not sufficiently supported by evidence in the record.”

“the reference letters from several of the Beneficiary's colleagues and supervisors in the Petitioner's organization do not mention the [product] or any intention to share it or other models or strategies developed by him with other nonprofit humanitarian organizations.”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

recommendation letter · discounted
“they do not offer detailed and concrete examples of how the Beneficiary's proposed endeavor has the potential for broad and measurable implications”
AAO decision text
other · discounted
“its probative value is limited and insufficient to support the Petitioner's assertions.”
AAO decision text
degree · credited

Where this case turned

Citations insufficient · p1 — citation counts without qualitative account of impact
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 not independent · p1 — letters come from employers and close collaborators, not independent experts

249coded 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 rejected the Petitioner's attempt to reframe the endeavor mid-proceeding (from internal HR operations to sector-wide scalable strategies), noting the shift was unsupported by the original letters and that later assertions on appeal (e.g., a named product/tool referenced 'for the first time on appeal') were not corroborated by existing evidence. The AAO also discounted an expert letter after finding the Petitioner mischaracterized the author's expertise.

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. 103.5
8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(2)
Flores v. Garland

What this case teaches

Analyst reading of the decision text.

Decisive factor

Petitioner failed to show the specific endeavor's broader implications beyond its own organization; relied on field importance and unsupported scalability claims instead of concrete evidence.

Transferable lesson

Define the endeavor as a discrete initiative with documented external adoption or dissemination evidence, not just internal impact or field-level importance.

Endeavor framing

vague

National-importance theory

economic_growth_generic · government_interest · field_advancement

Evidence targeting

person_focused

Cases in adjacent profiles

← Back to the case explorer