dismissedJUL082021_01B52032021-07-08 · 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, a financial manager, proposed to advise clients on financial investments, asset and wealth portfolio management, attracting foreign direct investment, and identifying global investment opportunities to enhance cross-border financial activities in the U.S.
Field: financial management/consulting · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“the relevant question is not the importance of the industry or profession in which the individual will work”
“we find the record does not show that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor stands to sufficiently extend beyond his immediate employer and clientele”
“he has not demonstrated that the specific endeavor he proposes to undertake has significant potential to employ U.S. workers”
“there is a high demand of professionals in my field”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- resume experience · discounted
“are considerations under Dhanasar's second prong, which shifts the focus from the proposed endeavor to the foreign national”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“the relevant question is not the importance of the industry or profession in which the individual will 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
- Occupational shortage argument rejected · p1 — argues a labor shortage — the labor-certification question, not Dhanasar
2,589coded 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 noted the dismissal rested on the first prong alone as an 'independent and alternate basis,' declining to reach prongs 2 and 3.
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.
- INA 203(b)(2)
- 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