dismissedJUN072024_03B52032024-06-07 · 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 establish a consulting company in Kentucky providing services for the development and management of energy efficiency and renewable energy projects to businesses relying on electrical energy.
Field: renewable energy consulting · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — addressed
The Director found, and AAO did not dispute, that the Petitioner qualified as an advanced degree professional.
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“in determining national importance, the relevant question is not the importance of the field, industry, or profession in which the individual will work; instead, the focus is on the "the specific endeavor that the foreign national proposes to undertake"”
“None of the submitted articles specifically mention the Petitioner's endeavor or discuss the government's interest in promoting the use of his company.”
“It is insufficient to claim an endeavor has national importance or would create a broad impact without providing evidence to substantiate such claims.”
“the Petitioner has not established how his specific endeavor stands to generate substantial positive economic effects in the region where his company will operate or in other parts of the United States”
“The Petitioner also did not show that his proposed endeavor has significant potential to employ U.S. workers or otherwise offers substantial positive economic effects for our nation.”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- media · discounted
“None of the submitted articles specifically mention the Petitioner's endeavor or discuss the government's interest in promoting the use of his company.”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
Where this case turned
- 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
2,501coded 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 rejected Petitioner's reliance on Buletini v. INS for a totality-of-evidence argument, clarifying that agencies need not individually address every piece of evidence; also cited Flores v. Garland regarding the discretionary nature of NIW denials.
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)
- Buletini v. INS
- Flores v. Garland
- Matter of L-A-C-
- Matter of O-R-E-
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