dismissedJUL172025_01B52032025-07-17 · appeal
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 physician and CEO, proposed to launch a U.S. company developing a mobile application connecting patients and caregivers with vetted home healthcare providers offering customized telehealth and in-home care services.
Field: home healthcare mobile application / medicine · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — addressed
Director found Petitioner qualified as advanced degree professional; not disputed on appeal.
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“However, while the Petitioner has established that the proposed endeavor has substantial merit, the record does not establish its national importance.”
“The Petitioner did not sufficiently establish that her proposed endeavor would significant potential to employ U.S. workers or have other substantial positive economic effects.”
“The Petitioner submitted large hiring and revenue projections with little objective support.”
“In fact, the Petitioner revised her projections from 68 employees and approximately $22 million in revenue annually...to 108 employees and $36.6 million in annual revenue in response to the RFE.”
“The Petitioner provided little detail as to the operation of this proposed application, how it would be different from others already in operation, how the technology would be used, or how it would be innovative.”
“Many proposed endeavors aim to advance STEM technologies and research...but also must have sufficiently broad potential implications to demonstrate national importance.”
“The Petitioner did not submit specific and targeted business plans but provides generic assertions about impacting numerous aspects of the economy.”
“Generalized conclusory statements that do not identify a specific impact to the field have little probative value.”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- business plan · discounted
“The Petitioner did not submit specific and targeted business plans but provides generic assertions about impacting numerous aspects of the economy.”
AAO decision text - contract revenue · discounted
“The Petitioner submitted large hiring and revenue projections with little objective support.”
AAO decision text - funding · discounted
“an amount leaving substantial uncertainty as to its large hiring and revenue projections”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“the report discussed by the Petitioner relates to the development of applications across all industries and provides little support for the potential impact of her proposed creation of an application in the home healthcare industry”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“she does not discuss in sufficient detail or document the technology that would be utilized to effectuate her proposed endeavor, nor how it is critical and emerging technologies”
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
- 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
1,312coded 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 emphasized an unexplained material change in hiring/revenue projections (68 to 108 employees, $22M to $36.6M) between initial filing and RFE response, citing Matter of Izummi's prohibition on material changes to conform a petition to USCIS requirements. Noted only $4,000 in petitioner's own investment funds despite large projections.
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
- 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(2)
- Flores v. Garland
- Matter of Ho
- Matter of Izummi
- 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