dismissedJUL052024_07B52032024-07-05 · appeal · Nebraska 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 proposed to provide OSHA-related occupational safety and health consultancy services to small and medium-sized businesses through her New York-based consulting company, training employers and employees on workplace safety.
Field: occupational health and safety · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“the record does not show that Petitioner's specific proposed endeavor's impact stands to sufficiently extend beyond her own company and its clientele to impact her field or industry, the U.S. economy, or societal welfare at a level commensurate with national importance.”
“the Director found that the Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to confirm whether her proposed endeavor will have substantial positive economic effects, particularly in an economically depressed area as contemplated by Dhanasar.”
“Our focus in considering national importance is not on the industry itself; instead, we focus on "the specific endeavor that the foreign national proposed to undertake."”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- business plan · discounted
“the Petitioner did not establish her proposed endeavor has broader implications”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“the Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to confirm whether her proposed endeavor will have substantial positive economic effects”
AAO decision text - recommendation letter · discounted
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
2,501coded 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 adopts and affirms the Director's decision under Burbano/Giday/Chen rather than conducting fully independent analysis, then declines to reach prongs 2 and 3 as unnecessary.
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
- Chen v. INS
- Matter of L-A-C-
- Poursina v. USCIS
Cases in adjacent profiles
- The Petitioner proposed to work as an IT consultant in the United States, providing cybersecurity and digital transforma
- The petitioner proposed to establish his own company providing specialized business consultancy, auditing, and training
- The petitioner proposed to work as a consultant engineer through his own company, specializing in development projects t
- The Petitioner proposed to start a project management consultancy in the United States that would help small and mid-siz
- The Petitioner proposed to establish a legal consultancy in the United States focused on alternative dispute resolution