EB-2 NIW Appeals: Logistics & Supply Chain
Last updated 2026-09-02
The AAO dismissed 93.4% of EB-2 NIW appeals from Logistics & Supply Chain petitioners in published non-precedent decisions from 2017–2025 (n=121). The criterion most often at issue was Prong 1: Substantial merit and national importance.
Outcomes by Year
| Year | Dismissed | Sustained | Remanded | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | 5 (—) | 0 | 0 | 5 |
| 2024 | 54 (93.1%) | 0 | 4 | 58 |
| 2023 | 37 (94.9%) | 0 | 2 | 39 |
| 2022 | 8 (—) | 1 | 1 | 10 |
| 2021 | 7 (—) | 0 | 0 | 7 |
| 2020 | 1 (—) | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 2017 | 1 (—) | 0 | 0 | 1 |
Criteria Breakdown
| Criterion | In Dismissed | In Sustained | Total | Dismissal Rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Prong 1: Substantial merit and national importance | 112 | 1 | 120 | 93.3% |
| Prong 2: Well positioned to advance the endeavor | 71 | 1 | 79 | 89.9% |
| Prong 3: On balance, waiver benefits the U.S. | 68 | 1 | 76 | 89.5% |
| Exceptional ability | 67 | 0 | 70 | 95.7% |
| Advanced degree | 37 | 0 | 40 | 92.5% |
Example Decisions
Sustained2022-11-17The appeal was sustained because the petitioner, a transportation researcher, successfully demonstrated eligibility for
Dismissed2025-02-26The appeal was dismissed because the AAO found the petitioner did not qualify as a member of the professions holding an
Dismissed2025-01-21The motion to reopen and reconsider was dismissed because the petitioner failed to present new facts or demonstrate an i
Dismissed2024-11-04The appeal was dismissed because the petitioner failed to establish that their proposed endeavor had 'national importanc
Dismissed2024-09-25The appeal was dismissed because the petitioner failed to establish eligibility as an individual of exceptional ability,
Dismissed2024-09-13The appeal was dismissed because the petitioner failed to establish that his proposed logistics consulting business had
Dismissed cases most often lacked a clearly defined proposed endeavor with specificity beyond a general field of work; non-speculative evidence (claims were conclusory or unsupported); evidence that benefits extend beyond the petitioner's own work or employer.
NYSDOT-era decisions (pre-2017)
Outcomes by Year
| Year | Dismissed | Sustained | Remanded | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2013 | 1 (—) | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 2012 | 2 (—) | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| 2011 | 5 (—) | 0 | 0 | 5 |
| 2007 | 1 (—) | 1 | 0 | 2 |
Criteria Discussed
| Criterion | In Dismissed | In Sustained | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intrinsic merit (NYSDOT) | 4 | 1 | 5 |
| National in scope (NYSDOT) | 4 | 1 | 5 |
| Substantially greater degree than U.S. worker (NYSDOT) | 4 | 1 | 5 |
| Advanced degree | 4 | 0 | 4 |
| Exceptional ability | 4 | 0 | 4 |
Sample: published AAO non-precedent decisions collected from uscis.gov. EB-2 NIW statistics reflect the Dhanasar framework era (2017–2025); the prior NYSDOT framework applied different legal standards. These are appeals, not all USCIS adjudications; approval rates here are not initial-filing approval rates. Read our full methodology.
Get Your Free Strategy Preview →