dismissedAPR022025_01B52032025-04-02 · appeal · 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, a general operations manager, sought to grow his Florida-based company selling cleaning and sanitizing products and offering consulting services, with plans to expand into other industries such as food production.
Field: cleaning and sanitizing products / consulting services · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — addressed
The Director found, and the AAO did not disturb, that the Petitioner is an advanced degree professional.
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“The Director could not conclude that the potential prospective impact of the proposed endeavor would have any implications beyond his company”
“The Director noted it lacked details of specific positions, who would occupy them, and numbers of employees”
“The author of the advisory letter did not provide detailed analysis and support for the conclusory assertions”
“any taxes paid would substantially affect the Florida or United States economy or tax revenue, at a level commensurate with national importance”
“The record does not establish, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the proposed endeavor has national importance.”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- business plan · discounted
“lacked details of specific positions, who would occupy them, and numbers of employees”
AAO decision text - recommendation letter · discounted
“did not provide detailed analysis and support for the conclusory assertions regarding the national importance”
AAO decision text - motion resubmission · ignored
“He does not address many of the evidentiary deficiencies detailed by the Director”
AAO decision text
Where this case turned
- Business plan speculative · p1 — projections without a documented basis or steps
- Economic claims unsupported · p1 — job/revenue projections with no corroborating basis
- Letters conclusory · p1 — letters praise skills in general terms without tracing specific impact
- Local, not national scope · p1 — impact confined to clients / a region
1,312coded 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
AAO expressly adopted and affirmed the Director's decision under the Burbano/Giday 'adopt and affirm' doctrine rather than conducting independent analysis, and declined to reach prongs two and three as unnecessary under Bagamasbad.
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. 103.3
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