dismissedAUG242023_07B52032023-08-24 · 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 church and homeschool teacher, providing education and individual/group care to children including special needs students.

Field: early childhood education / homeschool and church teaching · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“did not submit evidence showing that her endeavor's impact would extend beyond the students at the church or homeschool where she would teach”

“she does not explain how the Petitioner's endeavor rises to the level of national importance”

“she does not, however, explain how benefiting individual students rises to the level of national importance”

“he offers no evidence to substantiate this claim”

“in addressing the national importance aspect under the first prong of the Dhanasar framework we focus on the Petitioner's specific endeavor rather than the field or industry”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

recommendation letter · discounted
“she does not explain how the Petitioner's endeavor rises to the level of national importance”
AAO decision text
other · discounted
“the Director pointed out that in addressing the national importance aspect under the first prong of the Dhanasar framework we focus on the Petitioner's specific endeavor rather than the field or industry”
AAO decision text
motion resubmission · discounted
“some of which has been resubmitted on appeal, corroborates the claim that the Petitioner's endeavor rises to the level of national importance”
AAO decision text

Where this case turned

Economic claims unsupported · p1 — job/revenue projections with no corroborating basis
Endeavor too vague · p1 — described as a job role, not a defined undertaking
Field importance conflated with endeavor · p1 — argues the field matters, not the specific endeavor
Letters conclusory · p1 — letters praise skills in general terms without tracing specific impact
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 adopted and affirmed the Director's decision under Matter of Burbano rather than conducting a fully independent analysis. Footnote flags a potential degree-equivalency deficiency (foreign degree equating to only 2-3 years of U.S. study) for any future proceedings, though this was not the basis of denial here.

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)
Chen v. INS
Matter of L-A-C-

Cases in adjacent profiles

← Back to the case explorer