dismissedDEC122024_02B52032024-12-12 · appeal · Nebraska 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, a Brazilian financial specialist, proposed to open a financial consulting organization in the United States offering services to individuals and organizations intended to stimulate local and national economic activity.
Field: financial consulting · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“the plan does not explain how these forecasts were calculated, or adequately clarify how these projections will be realized”
“the record lacks evidence demonstrating that its impact would be nationally important”
“The record does not illustrate how creating 19 jobs and generating $1.5 million in revenue as projected in the business plan would have substantial positive economic effects on the level of national importance”
“she has not provided sufficient information and evidence to demonstrate the prospective impact of her proposed endeavor rises to the level of national importance or that her influence would reach beyond her clients and employees”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- business plan · discounted
“the lack of supporting details detracts from probative value of the business plan”
AAO decision text - recommendation letter · ignored
“These statements are more applicable to the second prong of the Dhanasar framework than to the national importance of her proposed endeavor”
AAO decision text
Where this case turned
- Business plan speculative · p1 — projections without a documented basis or steps
- Economic claims unsupported · p1 — job/revenue projections with no corroborating basis
- Local, not national scope · p1 — impact confined to clients / a region
1,312coded 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 explicitly credited substantial merit ('The Petitioner has established the substantial merit of her endeavor on appeal') but dismissed on national importance alone, splitting the prong 1 sub-elements. Declined to reach threshold EB-2 exceptional-ability eligibility and prongs 2-3 under Bagamasbad/L-A-C- doctrine.
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
- Chen v. INS
- INA 203(b)(2)
- 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