dismissedJUL222024_07B52032024-07-22 · 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 marketing and advertising consultant, proposed to establish a Digital Marketing Communication Platform using AI-driven programmatic advertising to help small and medium-sized U.S. businesses expand their market reach.
Field: marketing and advertising · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“the documents failed to establish that the Petitioner's specific endeavor has national implications, significant potential to employ U.S. workers, or otherwise offers substantial positive economic effects for the United States.”
“Although the Petitioner discusses the value and importance of assisting businesses in improving their marketing and advertising abilities in a rapidly changing digital environment, Dhanasar requires us to focus on the "the specific endeavor that the foreign national proposes to undertake," not the importance of the field”
“the letter generally states that the company "will provide the necessary funding for all areas of business activities" without specifying the amount of committed invested funds.”
“the record lacks evidence demonstrating a contractual commitment to invest in the proposed company.”
“the Petitioner has not demonstrated that her future company has significant potential to employ U.S. workers or otherwise offer substantial positive economic effects.”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- business plan · discounted
“provides no insight on the financials and personnel of the proposed company”
AAO decision text - funding · discounted
“without specifying the amount of committed invested funds”
AAO decision text - recommendation letter · discounted
“the emails from three U.S. entities that express interest in working with the Petitioner do not reflect investment funds”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“the Petitioner's skills, expertise, and abilities relate to the second prong of the Dhanasar framework”
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
- Funding absent · p1 — no documented funding or resources behind the plan
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 →
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
- Matter of L-A-C-
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