dismissedFEB222024_01B52032024-02-22 · 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 architect and project manager, proposed to continue working as an architect and project manager for U.S. companies, designing and coordinating architecture projects for U.S. clients.

Field: architecture and project management · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“benefits that are isolated to a single institution or locality in the United States might be so attenuated at the national level as to preclude a finding that the proposed endeavor has national importance.”

“Neither the letters nor any other evidence within the record provide insight into how the Petitioner's endeavor to work as an architect and project manager for architecture firms in Florida will positively impact the region or the industry beyond her employers and their clients.”

“It is important to note that the shortage of architects does not render her proposed endeavor nationally important under the Dhanasar framework.”

“the evidence of record does not demonstrate that the endeavor realistically has significant potential to employ U.S. workers or otherwise offer substantial positive economic benefits for the United States.”

“the relevant question is not the importance of the industry or profession in which the individual will work; instead, we focus on the "the specific endeavor that the foreign national proposes to undertake."”

“we find that the Petitioner made an impermissible material change to her proposed endeavor.”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

recommendation letter · discounted
“none of the authors discussed the Petitioner's endeavor as initially stated.”
AAO decision text
resume experience · discounted
“the Petitioner's experience and past accomplishments are not relevant to the first part of the Dhanasar framework, but to the second.”
AAO decision text
business plan · discounted
“the Petitioner introduced a new proposed endeavor in response to the RFE rather than establishing the national importance of the proposed endeavor described in the initial petition.”
AAO decision text
media · discounted
“These materials do not specifically describe the Petitioner's proposed endeavor or its potential impact, but rather amount to background information about general subjects.”
AAO decision text
other · discounted
“The letter therefore does not establish the national importance of the Petitioner's specific proposed U.S. work.”
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
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

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

The Petitioner attempted to switch her proposed endeavor mid-case—from working as an architect/project manager for U.S. companies to founding and serving as CEO of her own architecture firm—which the AAO deemed an impermissible material change under 8 C.F.R. 103.2(b)(1) and Matter of Izummi/Katigbak, requiring evaluation of only the originally stated endeavor. The firm was incorporated nearly three years after filing, underscoring the change's untimeliness.

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. 103.2(b)(1)
8 C.F.R. 103.3
Matter of E-M-
Matter of Izummi
Matter of Katigbak
Matter of L-A-C-

Cases in adjacent profiles

← Back to the case explorer