dismissedFEB012024_04B52032024-02-01 · 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, an accountant, proposed to assist U.S. individuals and companies with bookkeeping, tax preparation, financial reporting, and tax/accounting compliance, including services to cargo transport sector companies.

Field: accounting/tax services · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

EB-2 threshold — addressed

Petitioner established EB-2 eligibility as an advanced degree professional via a credentials evaluation finding her bachelor's degree plus progressive experience equivalent to a U.S. master's degree; exceptional ability alternative not reached.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“they do not reach the level of broader national or global impact that is required to find an endeavor has national importance”

“she has not provided specific evidence to show how her endeavor will affect her field broadly enough to be considered of national importance”

“when determining national importance, the relevant question is not the importance of the industry or profession in which the individual will work”

“a shortage of professionals in her field is insufficient, by itself, to establish the national importance of her endeavor”

“Her assertions related to the ripple effects of her endeavor on job creation, increased tax revenue... are not sufficiently supported in the record”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

recommendation letter · discounted
“this information does not explain how her endeavor will enhance the field more broadly”
AAO decision text
resume experience · discounted
“the demand for her services and future job offers are not evidence to support the national importance of her endeavor”
AAO decision text
other · discounted
“the opinion fails to explain with sufficient specificity or detail how her endeavor would alleviate these concerns”
AAO decision text
degree · credited

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
Field importance conflated with endeavor · p1 — argues the field matters, not the specific endeavor
Local, not national scope · p1 — impact confined to clients / a region
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 credited threshold EB-2 eligibility via advanced degree equivalency but found prong one dispositive against the petitioner, expressly declining to reach prongs two and three; expert opinion citing industry-wide market data (IBISWorld) and talent shortage statistics was rejected as focusing on the industry rather than the specific proposed endeavor.

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)(ii)
Matter of L-A-C-
Poursina v. USCIS

What this case teaches

Analyst reading of the decision text.

Decisive factor

Petitioner failed to show how her specific accounting endeavor, as opposed to the broader industry, would have national or field-wide impact beyond her employers/clients.

Transferable lesson

Tie evidence directly to the specific proposed endeavor's projected scale of impact, not industry-wide statistics or personal credentials better suited to prong two.

Endeavor framing

vague

National-importance theory

economic_growth_generic · field_advancement · geographic_or_shortage_area · us_competitiveness

Evidence targeting

person_focused

Cases in adjacent profiles

← Back to the case explorer