dismissedAUG142024_05B52032024-08-14 · 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 sought to work as a commercial specialist assisting companies with marketing plans, strategic planning, promotional events, sales, and financial and project management to enhance profitability and customer portfolios.
Field: commercial specialist / business administration · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — addressed
Director and AAO agreed Petitioner qualifies as advanced degree professional via bachelor's degree plus five years progressive experience.
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“the relevant question is not the importance of the field, industry, or profession in which the individual will work”
“working in the field is insufficient to establish the national importance of the proposed endeavor”
“the positive impact is for her direct employer and does not establish the broader impact that the Dhanasar framework requires”
“this does not establish the broader impact of her proposed endeavor”
“her proposed endeavor will not have broader implications within the field”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- other · discounted
“the evidence provided was in the form of links to articles, not the printed articles themselves”
AAO decision text - recommendation letter · discounted
“this does not establish the broader impact of her proposed endeavor”
AAO decision text - resume experience · discounted
“the positive impact is for her direct employer and does not establish the broader impact”
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
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 discounted RFE evidence because Petitioner submitted hyperlinks to articles rather than printed copies, precluding confirmation of the referenced sources even though AAO could access the links itself.
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)
- Flores v. Garland
- Matter of Ho
- Matter of L-A-C-
- Matter of Otiende
Cases in adjacent profiles
- The Petitioner proposed to work as an IT consultant in the United States, providing cybersecurity and digital transforma
- The petitioner proposed to establish his own company providing specialized business consultancy, auditing, and training
- The petitioner proposed to work as a consultant engineer through his own company, specializing in development projects t
- The Petitioner proposed to start a project management consultancy in the United States that would help small and mid-siz
- The Petitioner proposed to establish a legal consultancy in the United States focused on alternative dispute resolution