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 sought to establish a lobbying and legal consulting company in the U.S. offering government-relations and lobbying services to healthcare and pharmaceutical clients such as foundations, NGOs, and health plan providers.
Field: lobbying and government relations in healthcare/pharmaceutical industry · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — addressed
The Director found the Petitioner qualified as an advanced-degree professional, but the AAO noted the record lacked employer letters evidencing progressive experience under 8 C.F.R. 204.5(g)(1) and reserved the issue rather than deciding it, since the NIW analysis was dispositive.
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“the relevant question is not the importance of the industry or profession in which the individual will work; instead, we focus on the "the specific endeavor that the foreign national proposes to undertake."”
“the record does not establish that staffing levels of his specific proposed endeavor demonstrates "significant potential to employ U.S. workers"”
“he has not offered sufficient objective and independent evidence to demonstrate that the prospective impact of his proposed endeavor rises to the level of national importance”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- resume experience · discounted
“the record does not contain letters from employers as evidence of his progressive experience in compliance with 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(g)(1)”
AAO decision text - business plan · discounted
“the record does not establish that staffing levels of his specific proposed endeavor demonstrates "significant potential to employ U.S. workers"”
AAO decision text - media · discounted
“generic regarding the field, and does not support that the proposed endeavor has national importance”
AAO decision text
Where this case turned
- Economic claims unsupported · p1 — job/revenue projections with no corroborating basis
- Field importance conflated with endeavor · p1 — argues the field matters, not the specific endeavor
Notable
AAO rejected the argument that inclusion on the DHS STEM Designated Degree Program List (Pharmaeconomics/Pharmaceutical Economics) established national importance, citing USCIS Policy Manual F.5(D)(2) for the proposition that STEM classification alone is not dispositive. The AAO also expressly reserved the threshold EB-2 advanced-degree eligibility question rather than resolving it, since the national-importance failure was dispositive.
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. 204.5(g)(1)
- 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(2)
- Flores v. Garland
- Matter of L-A-C-
- USCIS Policy Manual F.5(D)(2)
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