dismissedAPR242024_04B52032024-04-24 · combined · Nebraska 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 data analytics specialist, proposed an endeavor involving a business plan she claimed would revitalize economically distressed areas by creating jobs and boosting local economic activity.
Field: data analytics · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“she does not establish the extent to which her "endeavor will provide jobs and boost the local economy and enhance the quality of life by increasing economic activity."”
“the documentation submitted on motion does not overcome our original decision, finding that the Petitioner did not demonstrate that her proposed endeavor met the national importance requirements”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- business plan · discounted
“a new version of her business plan she revised after we dismissed her appeal”
AAO decision text - motion resubmission · discounted
“Reasserting previously stated facts or resubmitting previously provided evidence does not constitute "new facts."”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“Because this evidence did not exist when the petition was filed, neither it nor the Petitioner's associated claims will factor into this motion's decision.”
AAO decision text
Where this case turned
- Economic claims unsupported · p1 — job/revenue projections with no corroborating basis
- Endeavor too vague · p1 — described as a job role, not a defined undertaking
2,501coded 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
Decision is primarily a procedural motions ruling; the AAO rejected new evidence (a blog post, revised business plan, White House Fact Sheet, SBIR/STTR and DoD printouts) because it postdated the petition filing date, and found the motion to reconsider deficient for failing to cite any authority showing legal or policy error in the prior appellate dismissal.
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)(12)
- 8 C.F.R. 103.5(a)(1)(ii)
- 8 C.F.R. 103.5(a)(2)
- 8 C.F.R. 103.5(a)(3)
- 8 C.F.R. 103.5(a)(4)
- Matter of Coelho
- Matter of Katigbak
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