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, a Spanish language educator, initially proposed forming strategic alliances with non-profit organizations to work as an educational consultant promoting a self-developed software application, but later described an intention to establish and direct their own non-governmental organization in the United States.
Field: Spanish language education · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — addressed
Director and AAO agreed Petitioner qualified as an advanced degree professional based on a foreign bachelor's degree and a U.S. master's degree in teaching Spanish as a foreign language.
Prong 2 — well positionednot established · dispositive
“the Petitioner did not adequately demonstrate with material, relevant, or probative evidence that they were well positioned to advance their proposed endeavor”
“the Petitioner did not provide a cognizable plan or model for their future activities”
“This rendered the remaining evidence in the record unreliable as it inconsistently referred to either the Petitioner's intent to work with non-profits or establish their own non-profit”
“The Dhanasar analytical framework cannot be applied to two dueling endeavors”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- business plan · discounted
“the Petitioner did not provide a cognizable plan or model for their future activities”
AAO decision text - recommendation letter · discounted
“We adopt and affirm the Director's analysis and decision regarding the second prong”
AAO decision text - certification membership · discounted
- other · discounted
Where this case turned
- Business plan speculative · p2 — projections without a documented basis or steps
- Endeavor too vague · p2 — described as a job role, not a defined undertaking
Notable
The AAO's footnote flags that the Petitioner inconsistently described the proposed endeavor (shifting from an NGO-partnership consulting role using a self-developed software app to establishing their own NGO), which it says undermines evaluation of substantial merit/national importance, but it explicitly declines to reach prong 1 or prong 3, resolving the case solely on prong 2 using an 'adopt and affirm' approach to the Director's decision, citing BIA/circuit case law endorsing that practice and rejecting the Petitioner's argument that failure to individually address each piece of evidence constitutes an abuse of discretion.
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.
- Buletini v. INS
- Chen v. INS
- Flores v. Garland
- Matter of L-A-C-
What this case teaches
Analyst reading of the decision text.
Petitioner presented two inconsistent, dueling endeavors (nonprofit collaboration vs. founding own NGO), making it impossible to assess a coherent plan or readiness to advance any single endeavor.
Define and consistently maintain a single, concrete proposed endeavor throughout filing and RFE response; shifting plans undermines prong 2 and forecloses prong 1 analysis.
vague
other
person_focused
Cases in adjacent profiles
- The Petitioner, an assistant professor of Arabic, proposed to continue teaching Levantine-Modern Standard Arabic to U.S.
- The Petitioner, a secondary school teacher, proposed to develop and implement an open educational resource program to ex
- The Petitioner proposed to establish a consulting company in Missouri to design and implement a nationally adaptable tea
- The Petitioner, an arts, drama, and music teacher and entrepreneur, sought EB-2 classification as an individual of excep
- The petitioner, a mathematics teacher with 17 years of experience, proposed to operate a company offering online math tu