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 operates her own business in the United States, though the decision does not specify the field or nature of the endeavor.
Field: unspecified business venture · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
How the evidence was treated
- motion resubmission · discounted
“she does not, however, state new facts supported by documentary evidence to address our prior decision”
AAO decision text
This record is one of thousands, each coded for the reasons it turned. A placement shows where your profile sits in that record, not what it predicts. See where your profile sits — 90 seconds →
Notable
This decision is purely procedural, addressing a motion to reopen after prior dismissals of the appeal and a combined motion to reopen/reconsider. The AAO does not reach any NIW prong analysis; it focuses on whether the Petitioner satisfied motion requirements under 8 C.F.R. 103.5, including prior findings that she failed to meet Matter of Lozada requirements regarding ineffective assistance of counsel and failed to show her untimeliness was reasonable and beyond her control. No new substantive evidence was found to warrant reopening.
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. 103.5(a)(1)(i)
- 8 C.F.R. 103.5(a)(1)(ii)
- 8 C.F.R. 103.5(a)(2)
- 8 C.F.R. 103.5(a)(3)
- 8 C.F.R. 103.5(a)(4)
- Matter of Coelho
What this case teaches
Analyst reading of the decision text.
Petitioner failed to state new facts supported by documentary evidence addressing the prior decision, as required for a motion to reopen under 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(2)-(3).
A motion to reopen must present new, documented facts directly rebutting the prior decision's reasoning, not reassert prior claims or general business history.
vague
person_focused
Cases in adjacent profiles
- The Beneficiary proposed to establish an asset investment management and compliance advisory firm in New York offering c
- The Petitioner proposed to develop and commercialize zeolite-based products in the United States, including agricultural
- The Petitioner proposed to operate a medical billing and healthcare revenue cycle management firm in the United States,
- The Petitioner proposed to establish and lead as CEO a cybersecurity and crisis management company in Florida, offering
- The Petitioner proposed to establish and operate an IT consultancy company in Michigan providing cloud migration, cybers