dismissedAUG132024_08B52032024-08-13 · 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 proposed to establish an independent financial and investment advisory firm, serving as owner, CEO, and certified financial planner, with a headquarters in one state and expansion plans to others.
Field: finance · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“on appeal, the Petitioner repeatedly provides inconsistent information which calls into question the specifics of his proposed endeavor”
“Because the Petitioner has not consistently described his proposed endeavor, we cannot conclude that he has sufficiently established its substantial merit and national importance”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- business plan · discounted
“The Petitioner must resolve these inconsistencies in the record with independent, objective evidence pointing to where the truth lies.”
AAO decision text - resume experience · discounted
“the Petitioner's resume and employments letters do not show that he has any experience either in or working with Mexico”
AAO decision text
Where this case turned
- Endeavor too vague · p1 — described as a job role, not a defined undertaking
1,581coded 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 Petitioner's appeal brief contained numerous internal inconsistencies (conflicting job titles, unexplained references to Mexico, mismatched revenue/job projections and location, and mistaken use of feminine pronouns), which the AAO relied on to find the endeavor insufficiently defined under prong 1, without reaching prongs 2 or 3.
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. 103.3
- 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(2)
- INA 203(b)(2)
- Matter of Ho
- Matter of L-A-C-
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