dismissedDEC142023_04B52032023-12-14 · 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 own and operate a long-distance freight trucking company transporting cargo for the construction, manufacturing, wholesale, and retail trade industries in the United States.
Field: long-distance freight trucking / business development · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — addressed
Record established Petitioner holds bachelor's and master's degrees, qualifying him as an advanced degree professional; Director had not disputed this.
Prong 1 — national importanceestablished
Prong 2 — well positionednot established · dispositive
“it does not show that he has a record of success in the U.S. freight trucking industry, which is a critical element of the Petitioner's proposed endeavor”
“The former business associates broadly referenced the Petitioner's strong work ethic and ability to forge business relationships with clients and business partners”
“the record shows that the company was formed in 2023, approximately eight months after this petition was filed in June 2022”
“there is no evidence that funds were available at the time of filing”
“Nor does the record contain sufficient evidence demonstrating that the Petitioner made progress in advancing his endeavor or that he had potential customers or business partners who were interested in his endeavor when this petition was filed”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- recommendation letter · discounted
“the referenced letters focused entirely on the Petitioner's prior work in Russia and did not indicate that the Petitioner had any knowledge of the transportation business in the United States”
AAO decision text - business plan · discounted
“The Petitioner did not, however, adequately explain how these projections were calculated.”
AAO decision text - funding · discounted
“there is no evidence that funds were available at the time of filing”
AAO decision text - degree · credited
- resume experience · discounted
“it does not show that he has a record of success in the U.S. freight trucking industry, which is a critical element of the Petitioner's proposed endeavor”
AAO decision text
Where this case turned
- Business plan speculative · p2 — projections without a documented basis or steps
- Funding absent · p2 — no documented funding or resources behind the plan
- Letters conclusory · p2 — letters praise skills in general terms without tracing specific impact
- No progress evidence · p2 — no documented movement toward the endeavor since filing
- Record of success insufficient · p2 — a claimed track record the documents do not establish
1,358coded 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 declined to reach a final determination on national importance (prong one) or on the third prong, resting its dismissal solely on the second prong failure, despite noting the record 'does not appear to support' national importance.
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
- Poursina v. USCIS
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