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 a martial arts academy in Florida serving athletes with special needs, instructors, children from low-income families, and war veterans.
Field: physical education / martial arts instruction · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — not met
AAO found the Titulo de Licenciado (3-year program) did not meet EDGE's four-year equivalency standard for a U.S. bachelor's degree, discounted the contrary academic evaluation, and found the employment letters insufficient to establish five years of progressive post-baccalaureate experience (no full-time/part-time indication, one letter from a co-worker not employer).
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“the Director determined that the Petitioner did not establish that his proposed endeavor would prospectively impact the region or nation beyond its students.”
“He does not, however, provide any new evidence or arguments which overcome the Director's determination.”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- degree · discounted
“based upon the information in EDGE and the length of the program as reflected in the transcript, we question its accuracy”
AAO decision text - resume experience · discounted
“the letters do not meet the requirements of 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(i)(B).”
AAO decision text - business plan · discounted
- recommendation letter · discounted
- other · discounted
“generally reiterates the benefits of his profession, his qualifications, and the claimed economic impacts”
AAO decision text
Where this case turned
- Economic claims unsupported · p1 — job/revenue projections with no corroborating basis
- Local, not national scope · p1 — impact confined to clients / a region
Notable
AAO withdrew the Director's favorable finding on advanced-degree classification (a rare adverse credibility/equivalency reversal against the petitioner), questioning the EDGE database equivalency and academic evaluation, yet still proceeded to affirm denial on Prong 1 national importance via adopt-and-affirm of the Director's reasoning, reserving the exceptional-ability classification question and Prongs 2-3 as unnecessary under Bagamasbad.
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)
- 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(3)(iii)
- Chen v. INS
- Matter of L-A-C-
- Poursina v. USCIS
What this case teaches
Analyst reading of the decision text.
Petitioner failed to overcome Director's finding that the endeavor's impact was local (students only), not shown to extend regionally or nationally; also failed underlying EB-2 advanced-degree eligibility due to insufficient credential/experience evidence.
Support national-importance claims with concrete, quantified evidence of broader regional/national impact and new appellate evidence, not mere restatement of personal qualifications and profession benefits.
moderate
economic_job_creation · economic_growth_generic
person_focused
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