dismissedAPR182024_02B52032024-04-18 · 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.

Petitioner initially proposed to work as a general and operations manager leveraging his mechanical engineering background, and later, only after an RFE, claimed he would instead own and operate a heavy equipment rental services company.

Field: mechanical engineering / general operations management · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“we will not consider the Petitioner's materially changed proposed endeavor of opening, owning, and operating his own business.”

“the letter discusses the importance of general and operations managers rather than focusing on the national importance of the Petitioner's specific, proposed endeavor.”

“the record does not show through supporting documentation how his endeavor sufficiently extends beyond his prospective employer or clients, to impact the field or the U.S. economy more broadly at a level commensurate with national importance.”

“Without evidence regarding any projected U.S. economic impact or job creation attributable to his particular future work, the record does not show any benefits to the U.S. regional or national economy resulting from his services would reach the level of "substantial positive economic effects" contemplated by Dhanasar.”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

business plan · discounted
“we will not consider the Petitioner's materially changed proposed endeavor of opening, owning, and operating his own business.”
AAO decision text
recommendation letter · discounted
“the letter discusses the importance of general and operations managers rather than focusing on the national importance of the Petitioner's specific, proposed endeavor.”
AAO decision text
other · discounted
“the Petitioner must demonstrate the national importance of his specific, proposed endeavor of providing his particular general and operations manager services.”
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
Endeavor too vague · p1 — described as a job role, not a defined undertaking
Field importance conflated with endeavor · p1 — argues the field matters, not the specific endeavor
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 declined to consider the Petitioner's shift from a general/operations manager endeavor to owning and operating his own business, finding it a materially changed endeavor not permissible under Matter of Izummi/Bardouille since the business plan and supporting documents postdated the RFE.

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. 103.2(b)(1)
8 C.F.R. 103.3
Flores v. Garland
Matter of Bardouille
Matter of Izummi
Matter of L-A-C-

Cases in adjacent profiles

← Back to the case explorer