dismissedMAR112025_02B52032025-03-11 · motion_reconsider · 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 proposed to work as a fitness director, arguing that her training plan, expert opinion letter, and supporting research demonstrated the national importance of her services.
Field: fitness/health services · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“unlike the scientific researcher in Dhanasar, the Petitioner did not demonstrate that her proposed endeavor of working as a fitness director at offers broader implications in her field or that her services or business would largely influence the field and rise to the level of national importance.”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- business plan · discounted
- recommendation letter · discounted
“she does not explain how our specific conclusions applied a stricter standard of proof”
AAO decision text - motion resubmission · discounted
“a motion to reconsider is not a process by which the party may submit in essence, the same brief and seek reconsideration by generally alleging error in the prior decision”
AAO decision text
Where this case turned
- Endeavor too vague · p1 — described as a job role, not a defined undertaking
- Local, not national scope · p1 — impact confined to clients / a region
1,581coded 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
This is the Petitioner's second motion to reconsider following a prior dismissed appeal and first motion to reconsider; AAO reiterates that re-arguing the same brief without identifying legal or policy error is insufficient, per Matter of O-S-G- and Matter of Coelho.
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)(ii)
- 8 C.F.R. 103.5(a)(3)
- 8 C.F.R. 103.5(a)(4)
- Matter of Coelho
- Matter of O-S-G-
Cases in adjacent profiles
- The Petitioner, an aircraft mechanic and instructor, proposed to enhance aviation maintenance training programs, support
- The Petitioner seeks EB-2 classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree with a national inter
- The petitioner sought an EB-2 national interest waiver of the job offer requirement, but the substance of the proposed e
- The Beneficiary, sponsored by a private airline, sought EB-2 classification as an individual of exceptional ability in a
- The petitioner sought an EB-2 national interest waiver as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree; the sp