dismissedJUL092024_11B52032024-07-09 · 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 operate his own accounting and financial management consulting firm, providing tax consulting, financial advice, and financial statement services to individual and corporate clients in Virginia and Illinois.
Field: financial management and tax consulting · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“it does not provide insight into his plan to operate a financial consultancy company or show how this specific endeavor would have a potential prospective impact of national importance”
“These claims do not, however, provide an objective basis for his projections, nor are the numbers corroborated by probative evidence”
“that reasoning is speculative and not based on any objective evidence related to his proposed endeavor”
“fluctuating opportunities within the general labor market do not demonstrate that his endeavor stands to have an impact on the financial or tax consultancy industries”
“the statement does not describe what access or practices the Petitioner's firm will introduce”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- business plan · discounted
“the information in the business plan is not supported by objective evidence to demonstrate how his firm would have a prospective national impact”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“this material provides general information related to the field ... it does not ... show how this specific endeavor would have a potential prospective impact”
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
- 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 noted the appeal failed to specifically identify any erroneous conclusion of law or fact in the Director's decision, calling this 'alone ... grounds for dismissal' under 8 C.F.R. 103.3(a)(1)(v), before proceeding to address the merits anyway.
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.
- 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