dismissedJUN112024_09B52032024-06-11 · 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 open and operate a startup business providing fitness and well-being consulting services to companies and individuals in the Florida area, including a prior role as a physical trainer for police officers.
Field: fitness and well-being consulting · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“the matter here is not whether these subjects are nationally important”
“the letters do not show the broader impact of the Petitioner's work rather than limited to his specific clients”
“the Petitioner did not present any supporting evidence, corroborating the assertions and figures”
“the business plan does not make any employment projections, demonstrating that such future staffing levels would provide substantial economic benefits”
“the record does not show through supporting documentation how his endeavor sufficiently extends beyond his prospective clients”
“the letter does not explain how the Petitioner's particular services or company would have broader implications for our country”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- recommendation letter · discounted
“the letters do not show the broader impact of the Petitioner's work rather than limited to his specific clients”
AAO decision text - business plan · discounted
“the Petitioner did not present any supporting evidence, corroborating the assertions and figures”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“the letter does not explain how the Petitioner's particular services or company would have broader implications for our country”
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
- Letters conclusory · p1 — letters praise skills in general terms without tracing specific impact
- 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 explicitly declined to reach the second and third prongs or the underlying EB-2 classification, citing INS v. Bagamasbad and Matter of L-A-C- for the proposition that agencies need not make advisory findings on unnecessary issues. The decision expressly labels dismissal on prong 1 as an 'independent and alternate basis' for the outcome.
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
- Flores v. Garland
- 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