This case is from a USCIS Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) appeal decision. Appeal cases represent a subset of petitions and may not reflect typical outcomes.
Proposed Endeavor
The Petitioner proposes to work in the United States as a fashion communication specialist. He explains that his work would not be limited to one company, instead he would form partnerships with small and start-up businesses to help improve their reputation, presence, and economic growth through "effective specialized communication strategies." His goal is "to intricately design communication strategies that transcend the conventional" through "brand positioning, the precision of targeted messaging, and the seamless integration of comprehensive marketing communications." Methods he would employ include "strategic influencer collaborations, optimization of digital media platforms, and the artful craft of strategic storytelling."
Framework Evaluation
0 of 3 criteria met
1The proposed endeavor has both substantial merit and national importanceNot Met
The proposed endeavor was found to have substantial merit, but the Petitioner failed to provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate its national importance or broader implications beyond individual business partnerships.
Why This Petition Was Denied
The appeal was dismissed because the Petitioner failed to establish eligibility for EB-2 classification as an advanced degree professional, as the foreign bachelor's degree and academic transcript did not sufficiently demonstrate equivalence to a U.S. bachelor's degree (e.g., 3 years of study vs. typical 4 years for a U.S. baccalaureate, and lack of general studies coursework). Additionally, the Petitioner did not prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the proposed endeavor had national importance under the first Dhanasar prong, lacking specific evidence of broader impact beyond individual businesses, despite claims of economic growth and societal welfare benefits. The AAO did not evaluate the second and third Dhanasar prongs.
Request for Evidence (RFE)
Unsuccessfully Addressed
The Director determined that the Petitioner did not establish national importance (Prong 1), was not well-positioned to advance the endeavor (Prong 2), and that waiving the job offer would not benefit the U.S. (Prong 3). The Petitioner responded by submitting additional evidence and arguing that the Director misapplied the law and did not consider the full scope of the evidence, particularly regarding the broader impact of the endeavor.
RFE Targets
The proposed endeavor has both substantial merit and national importanceprong 2prong 3
The Petitioner proposes to work as a communication specialist in the fashion industry. The endeavor involves work in fashion communication, with the petitioner seeking to demonstrate its broader implications for the field, the U.S. economy, or societal welfare.
The Petitioner proposes to work in the United States as a marketing specialist, focusing on strategic communication planning, graphic design, brand management, digital marketing, and team management, specifically tailored for the fashion industry. The endeavor aims to boost sales, performance, and impact the U.S. marketing field.
The petitioner proposes to work in the United States as a marketing and communications specialist through her own company, of which she owns 10%, and her current position as head of marketing for a food and beverage company. She contends her services will indirectly generate jobs for U.S. citizens and contribute to the overall revenue growth of the marketing consultants industry.
The petitioner proposes to establish a company in the United States to provide consulting and training for 'image specialists.' The services would include wardrobe consulting, personal styling, make-up artistry, and brand image consulting, aimed at empowering women and minorities.
Frequently Asked Questions
A dismissed EB-2 NIW petition means USCIS found the evidence insufficient to meet the eligibility criteria. Common reasons include weak documentation, failure to meet the required number of criteria, or insufficient evidence of the claimed qualifications. Petitioners can refile with stronger evidence or explore alternative visa categories.
