NIW Bearings
dismissedAPR292025_13B52032025-04-29 · 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 planned to establish and serve as CEO of a U.S.-based marketing and communications consultancy helping U.S. companies export to and operate in Brazil, offering strategy, creative, and operations services via a digital platform.

Field: marketing and communications consulting (export/import services to Brazil) · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“The evidence submitted by the Petitioner does not establish her proposed endeavor would operate on such a large scale as to have a national impact on the communications industry.”
“the business plan does not provide sufficient explanation for the basis of these projections”
“The Petitioner has not established that her proposed endeavor stands to promote job creation in communications as claimed.”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

  • business plan · discounted
    “the business plan does not provide sufficient explanation for the basis of these projections”
    AAO decision text
  • recommendation letter · discounted
    “The Petitioner's skills, knowledge, and prior work in her field relate to the second prong of the Dhanasar framework”
    AAO decision text
  • resume experience · discounted
    “The Petitioner's skills, knowledge, and prior work in her field relate to the second prong of the Dhanasar framework”
    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
  • 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

The AAO resolved the entire appeal on Dhanasar prong 1 (national importance), expressly declining to reach prongs 2 and 3; the case centers on a solo-founder consultancy whose projected job creation (25 jobs, $1.7M revenue by year five) was found unsubstantiated and too localized to establish national importance.

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.

  • Flores v. Garland
  • Matter of L-A-C-

What this case teaches

Analyst reading of the decision text.

Decisive factor

The consultancy's benefits stayed with the clients it would serve; her professional background was prong-2 material, and unexplained job and revenue projections could not show the endeavor operating at a nationally important scale.

Transferable lesson

A client-service consultancy must show impact beyond the clients it serves; the argument that clients will grow and hire is a ripple-effect claim that needs evidence, not assertion.

Endeavor framing

moderate

National-importance theory

economic_job_creation · economic_growth_generic · us_competitiveness

Evidence targeting

person_focused

Cases in adjacent profiles

← Back to the case explorer