dismissedAUG272025_02B52032025-08-27 · appeal
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 work as a financial analyst and lead a financial advisory initiative offering financial literacy programs, investment management, and cross-border business advisory services to underserved communities and Brazilian companies entering the U.S. market.
Field: financial services / financial advisory · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — not met
AAO found the record did not establish the petitioner's MBA was from an accredited institution, so it was not sufficiently clear he held a qualifying advanced degree; this was addressed but not dispositive since prong 1 failure was dispositive.
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“the plan is brief and vague, lacking detailed information and evidence corroborating the proposed endeavor rises to the level of national impmiance”
“Without sufficient documentary evidence that his proposed job duties as a financial analyst and the leader for his financial advisory services initiative would impact the financial services field more broadly, rather than benefiting himself and his clients”
“Without more evidence detailing the specifics of the projects beyond broad interest in the Petitioner's proposed financial services work”
“Likewise, the Petitioner's intent to transfer his professional knowledge to others through trainings and mentoring does not demonstrate an impact on the financial services and data analytics fields more broadly”
“the growth and importance of an industry are not sufficient to meet the national importance requirement under the Dhanasar framework”
“the opinion's focus on the importance of the financial services industry to the economy, and how the Petitioner's professional experience would help individuals and businesses is misplaced”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- business plan · discounted
“the plan is brief and vague, lacking detailed information and evidence corroborating the proposed endeavor rises to the level of national impmiance”
AAO decision text - recommendation letter · discounted
“they do not explain the specifics of the partnerships and projects with the Petitioner”
AAO decision text - degree · discounted
“we conclude that this determination is not supported by the record”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“The opinion does not, however, focus on the Petitioner's specific endeavor and its potential prospective impact”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“their overall significance does not establish the national importance of the Petitioner's proposed endeavor in particular”
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
- 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
- Occupational shortage argument rejected · p1 — argues a labor shortage — the labor-certification question, not Dhanasar
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 raised sua sponte a threshold EB-2 issue not disputed below: the accreditation status of the petitioner's foreign MBA-granting institution, citing Matter of Yau. It addressed this despite it being non-dispositive, since national importance failure was dispositive; AAO expressly declined to reach prongs 2 and 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. 103.5
- 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(2)
- Flores v. Garland
- Matter of E-M-
- Matter of L-A-C-
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