dismissedFEB272025_06B52032025-02-27 · 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 operates a business that recruits international students, including STEM students, for placement at U.S. higher education institutions.

Field: international student recruitment for U.S. higher education · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

EB-2 threshold — not met

AAO found, contrary to the Director, that the Petitioner failed to establish advanced-degree eligibility because his foreign academic records lacked the required certified English translations under 8 C.F.R. 103.2(b)(3) and therefore could not be given evidentiary weight.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“The evidence provided does not demonstrate that this specific endeavor is of national importance.”

“The Petitioner has not adequately described how his business will have a broader impact on the field of international student recruitment beyond its clients.”

“It is not the importance of the field that determines an endeavor's national importance, but rather how the specific endeavor will impact the field on a level commensurate with national importance.”

“the plan does not explain how these forecasts were calculated, or adequately clarify how these projections will be realized, nor does the record contain evidence to support the business plan's financial projections.”

“the record does not illustrate how creating 37 jobs and generating net profit as projected in the business plan, would have substantial positive economic effects on the level of national importance.”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

degree · discounted
“they do not have any evidentiary weight and will not be considered”
AAO decision text
business plan · discounted
“the plan does not explain how these forecasts were calculated, or adequately clarify how these projections will be realized”
AAO decision text
recommendation letter · discounted
“They do not stipulate how the Petitioner's proposed endeavor will contribute to the international student recruitment field on a nationally important level.”
AAO decision text
contract revenue · discounted
“speak to the Petitioner's past accomplishments and experiences, not the specific endeavor's potential impact”
AAO decision text
media · discounted
“of little evidentiary value as they do not address the Petitioner's specific 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
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

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 exercised de novo review to overturn the Director's uncontested favorable finding on advanced-degree eligibility, faulting the Petitioner for lacking certified translations of foreign academic records even though this was not a ground raised by the Director or on appeal; it then still reached and dismissed on Dhanasar prong one grounds, expressly declining to address prongs two and three or the newly raised threshold defect's effect on the outcome.

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)
Flores v. Garland
Matter of L-A-C-

Cases in adjacent profiles

← Back to the case explorer