dismissedAUG072024_07B52032024-08-07 · appeal · 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 compliance attorney, proposed to continue identifying healthcare fraud, waste, and abuse and conducting federal/state tax compliance research for her employer.

Field: healthcare compliance / tax law · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

EB-2 threshold — addressed

Petitioner was found to qualify as an advanced degree professional; only prong analysis was at issue.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“Here, the Petitioner must establish the national importance of her proposed endeavor rather than the importance of her work as an attorney”

“does not establish that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor, which she describes as a continuation of the kind of work she currently performs for her U.S. employer, sufficiently extends beyond her current or future employers and their clientele”

“the Petitioner did not claim or demonstrate how her endeavor will have significant potential to employ U.S. workers or otherwise offers substantial positive economic effects for our nation”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

resume experience · discounted
“those relate to the second prong of the Dhanasar framework”
AAO decision text
media · discounted
“does not establish that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor... sufficiently extends beyond her current or future employers”
AAO decision text

Where this case turned

Economic claims unsupported · p1 — job/revenue projections with no corroborating basis
Employer-specific benefit · p1 — "work furthers my company's product" — value accrues to one firm
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

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

AAO explicitly adopts and affirms the Director's decision under Matter of Burbano rather than independently restating full analysis; footnote clarifies that expertise/credential evidence belongs to prong two, not prong one.

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.

Chen v. INS
Flores v. Garland
Matter of L-A-C-

What this case teaches

Analyst reading of the decision text.

Decisive factor

The endeavor was framed as ordinary continuation of employer-specific compliance/tax work, not shown to extend beyond current employer/clients to impact the broader field or economy.

Transferable lesson

Define the endeavor as a distinct undertaking with demonstrable field-wide, economic, or policy impact beyond routine employment duties for a single employer.

Endeavor framing

vague

National-importance theory

economic_growth_generic · government_interest

Evidence targeting

person_focused

Cases in adjacent profiles

← Back to the case explorer