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 establish her own accounting consultancy in Florida offering accounting, financial, and tax planning services to small businesses, along with free online financial content, and to hire up to seven employees within two years.
Field: accounting · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — not met
Petitioner did not establish 5 years of progressive post-baccalaureate experience for the advanced-degree pathway (employment letter did not confirm full-time status, and tax records suggested self-employment), and met only two of six exceptional-ability criteria (education and licensure), failing the experience, salary, and recognition criteria.
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“The Petitioner has not shown that her plan to offer her services to clients across the country would raise the potential prospective impact of this work to that of national interest”
“the record does not show that her endeavor has significant potential to employ U.S. workers or has other substantial positive economic effects”
“the basis for these projections is not apparent, as the plan lacks sufficient analysis”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- resume experience · discounted
“The Petitioner must resolve this inconsistency in the record with independent, objective evidence pointing to where the truth lies.”
AAO decision text - certification membership · credited
- recommendation letter · discounted
“such letters, written for the purpose of supporting a petition for immigration benefits, are generally less probative than evidence which contemporaneously recognizes a petitioner”
AAO decision text - business plan · discounted
“the basis for these projections is not apparent, as the plan lacks sufficient analysis”
AAO decision text - degree · credited
All 6 evidence items
- other · discounted
“it does not show how her earnings compared with those of top earners in her field”
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
- Local, not national scope · p1 — impact confined to clients / a region
Notable
Although the Petitioner failed the underlying EB-2 classification (both advanced-degree and exceptional-ability pathways), which alone would render her ineligible for a waiver, the AAO nevertheless proceeded to 'briefly review' and separately deny under Dhanasar prong 1, making the national-importance failure the formally identified dispositive basis while noting the threshold failure as an independent bar.
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. 204.5(k)(2)
- Matter of Ho
- 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