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 Turkish national, proposed to found and serve as general manager of an academy in Georgia providing ESL programs, cultural adaptation support, and personal development coaching to integrate immigrants, especially Turkish immigrants, into the U.S. educational system and corporate landscape.
Field: ESL/immigrant integration education services · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — not met
AAO found the Petitioner did not establish she holds a foreign equivalent bachelor's degree due to a deficient blanket translation certification, an unexplained discrepancy between degree conferral date and diploma date, and an unreliable credential evaluation; also found her intended occupation (tutor, SOC 25-3041) does not require a bachelor's degree and thus does not meet the definition of a profession. AAO withdrew SCOPS's contrary finding that she qualified as an advanced degree professional.
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“the relevant question is not the importance of the field, industry, or profession in which the individual will work, but the specific endeavor the Petitioner proposes to undertake”
“the Petitioner in her appeal, as in the petition, does not corroborate her assertions and estimates of her academy's potential to broadly enhance societal welfare with independent evidence.”
“Nor does she explain and substantiate how her assertions and projections, even if substantiated, would sufficiently extend beyond the benefits to her prospective clients and/or students”
AAO decision text
Prong 2 — well positionednot established
“her employment, recommendation, and expert letters do not speak to her ability to lead a business, nor has she provided evidence of past successes in related efforts.”
“while her employment letters discuss her duties, they do not discuss accomplishments or the impact of her work to demonstrate she is well positioned to advance her proposed endeavor.”
“the underlying record does not contain evidence of potential customers or investors.”
AAO decision text
Prong 3 — balance of factorsnot established
“the Petitioner has not demonstrated that her contributions to integrate immigrants into the U.S. educational system and corporate landscape would be nationally important or that she is well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor.”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- business plan · discounted
“does not corroborate her assertions and estimates of her academy's potential to broadly enhance societal welfare with independent evidence”
AAO decision text - recommendation letter · discounted
“her employment, recommendation, and expert letters do not speak to her ability to lead a business”
AAO decision text - degree · discounted
“the submission of a single translation certification that does not identify the document or documents it purportedly accompanies does not meet the requirements of the regulation”
AAO decision text - resume experience · discounted
“her employment letters discuss her duties, they do not discuss accomplishments or the impact of her work”
AAO decision text
Where this case turned
- Economic claims unsupported · p1 — job/revenue projections with no corroborating basis
- 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
- 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
- Derivative of Prong 1/2 failure · p3 — prong three fails only because prongs one or two did — no independent ground
Notable
AAO withdrew SCOPS's favorable finding that the Petitioner qualified as an advanced degree professional, finding instead that she failed to establish the underlying EB-2 classification due to translation certification deficiencies and an unexplained diploma date discrepancy, and because her intended occupation (tutor, SOC 25-3041) does not require a bachelor's degree. AAO nonetheless proceeded to independently analyze and reject all three Dhanasar prongs even though SCOPS's denial rested only on prong one, rejecting the Petitioner's argument that agency silence on prongs two and three is presumptively favorable.
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)(3)
- 8 C.F.R. 103.3
- 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(2)
- Matter of Ho
- Matter of L-A-C-
- Matter of O-R-E-
- Matter of R-A-M-
What this case teaches
Analyst reading of the decision text.
Impact stopped at her students and clients and projections were uncorroborated; separately she failed EB-2 eligibility, with defective degree translations and a tutor occupation code requiring no degree.
Impact confined to your own students is not national importance; and a defective degree translation can sink EB-2 eligibility before the waiver is reached.
vague
economic_growth_generic · economic_job_creation · government_interest
person_focused
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