dismissedJAN042024_06B52032024-01-04 · 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 reinsurance brokerage company (E-R-) linking Colombian, Chilean, and Peruvian insurance markets with the U.S. underwriter market, serving as its CEO.
Field: reinsurance brokerage / mechanical engineering · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“the Petitioner repeatedly emphasized the national importance of his field rather than the national importance of his proposed endeavor of owning and operating E-R-”
“the alleged shortage of an occupation does not render a proposed endeavor nationally important under the Dhanasar framework”
“the record does not show through supporting documentation how his specific services with E-R- stand to sufficiently extend beyond his prospective clients”
“the Petitioner did not demonstrate how his business' claimed revenue and employment projections, even if credible or plausible, have significant potential to employ U.S. workers”
“the Petitioner did not show that such future staffing levels would provide substantial economic benefits to ... the region or U.S. economy more broadly”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- business plan · discounted
“the business plan does not establish the benefits to the regional or national economy would reach the level of "substantial positive economic effects"”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“The Petitioner's arguments and evidence relate more to the substantial merit of the proposed endeavor rather than the national importance part.”
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
- 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
AAO explicitly distinguished field-level importance arguments (global reinsurance market, COVID-19, insurance regulation, etc.) from endeavor-specific importance, and rejected an occupational-shortage argument as belonging to the labor certification process rather than the Dhanasar national importance analysis.
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
- Matter of L-A-C-
- 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