dismissedJUL022024_04B52032024-07-02 · 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 work as CEO of his own company providing data science and business intelligence services to help small businesses with digital integration, data security, and decision-making.
Field: data science / business intelligence · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — addressed
AAO agreed with the Director that Petitioner established eligibility as an advanced degree professional.
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“the matter here is not whether these initiatives, as well as the topics of data analytics or software industry experts... are nationally important”
“the alleged shortage of occupations or occupational skills does not render his proposed endeavor nationally important under the Dhanasar framework”
“the Petitioner did not present any supporting evidence, corroborating the assertions and figures”
“This recommendation lacks a clear explanation of the Petitioner's specific, proposed endeavor”
“The record lacks supporting documentation to show how his endeavor sufficiently extends beyond his prospective clients or employees”
“the Petitioner has not shown that his endeavor aims to advance STEM technologies and research or has broad implications other than providing his limited professional services”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- recommendation letter · discounted
“the letters do not show the far-reaching impact of the Petitioner's work, only the limited influence on his specific clients”
AAO decision text - business plan · discounted
“the Petitioner did not present any supporting evidence, corroborating the assertions and figures”
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
- Endeavor too vague · p1 — described as a job role, not a defined undertaking
- Field importance conflated with endeavor · p1 — argues the field matters, not the specific endeavor
- Letters conclusory · p1 — letters praise skills in general terms without tracing specific impact
- Occupational shortage argument rejected · p1 — argues a labor shortage — the labor-certification question, not Dhanasar
1,358coded 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 rejected an occupational-shortage/labor-market-need argument (69% of employers struggling to fill positions) as irrelevant to national importance, noting such shortages are addressed through the labor certification process itself.
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
- Flores v. Garland
- Matter of L-A-C-
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