dismissedJUN132024_05B52032024-06-13 · combined · 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 proposed a business endeavor related to startup firms, claiming it would create jobs and have positive economic effects on small businesses.
Field: startup/small business · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“We concluded the Petitioner did not establish the national importance of his proposed endeavor.”
“the evidence did not demonstrate the Petitioner's specific proposed endeavor would broadly impact small businesses on a national scale”
“they did not demonstrate his proposed endeavor would have economic effects on a level of national importance, as the Petitioner claimed”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- business plan · discounted
“did not demonstrate his proposed endeavor would have economic effects on a level of national importance”
AAO decision text - motion resubmission · discounted
“does not assert any new facts and does not submit any evidence”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“did not demonstrate his proposed endeavor would broadly impact small businesses on a national scale”
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
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 →
Notable
The Petitioner cited a nonexistent regulation, '8 C.F.R. section 203(b)(2)(A)(B)(C)', which the AAO noted does not exist (Part 203 is not in Title 8 CFR), suggesting possible confusion with the INA section. The AAO treated this as an unsupported legal argument.
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. 103.5
- 8 C.F.R. 103.5(a)(4)
- Matter of Coelho
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