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, an SAP consultant with over 19 years of experience, proposed to establish an independent consulting practice helping U.S. small and medium-sized enterprises implement and optimize SAP enterprise resource planning solutions.
Field: SAP/ERP consulting for small and medium enterprises · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — addressed
USCIS found, and AAO agreed, that the Petitioner's foreign equivalent of a master's degree in business administration satisfied the EB-2 advanced-degree professional classification.
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“this evidence provides background information that supports the importance of the industry in which the Petitioner will work; it does not establish the national importance of the Petitioner's intention to offer consulting services in this industry”
“An entrepreneur cannot demonstrate national importance solely by opening a consulting firm for those working or seeking to work in a nationally important occupation.”
“we conclude that this description does not provide specific, credible details that establish that his consulting services have the potential to benefit U.S. enterprises at a national level”
“these letters primarily provide general, conclusory statements about the importance of the industry, small businesses, and SAP and digital technologies”
“the Petitioner has not provided evidence to demonstrate a sufficiently direct connection between the proposed endeavor and any demonstrable economic or societal welfare effects that would be commensurate with national importance”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- recommendation letter · discounted
“these letters primarily provide general, conclusory statements about the importance of the industry, small businesses, and SAP and digital technologies”
AAO decision text - business plan · discounted
“this description does not provide specific, credible details that establish that his consulting services have the potential to benefit U.S. enterprises at a national level”
AAO decision text - media · discounted
“The reports and articles do not provide credible, probative evidence of the endeavor's national importance”
AAO decision text - degree · credited
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
- Letters conclusory · p1 — letters praise skills in general terms without tracing specific impact
Notable
AAO addressed and rejected a due-process-style argument (citing Buletini v. INS) that USCIS failed to consider all submitted evidence, relying on multiple circuit court cases (Osuchukwu, Ren, Larita-Martinez) for the proposition that agencies need not discuss every piece of evidence individually. The decision also cites Flores v. Garland to characterize NIW adjudication as discretionary.
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. 103.2(b)(1)
- Buletini v. INS
- Flores v. Garland
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