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 U.S. management consultancy serving small- and medium-sized businesses, offering financial/tax consulting, organizational diagnosis, technology integration, executive mentoring, and digital platform training, with a stated focus on U.S.-Brazil business expansion.
Field: management consulting / accounting · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — addressed
AAO agreed with SCOPS that the Petitioner qualified as an advanced degree professional based on her bachelor's degree plus 13+ years of progressive experience.
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“the record does not establish the specific contributions' national significance”
“she has not established that her specific endeavor's economic stimulus would have national implications”
“she has not demonstrated that she and her small, proposed firm would help a nationally significant number of distressed businesses”
“While her venture may economically benefit the local community and even the region, the Petitioner has not established that her specific endeavor's economic stimulus would have national implications.”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- business plan · discounted
“they do not demonstrate how the ten-person firm, its suppliers, and customers would generate economic benefits substantial enough to attain national importance”
AAO decision text - resume experience · credited
Where this case turned
- Economic claims unsupported · p1 — job/revenue projections with no corroborating basis
- Local, not national scope · p1 — impact confined to clients / a region
Notable
AAO acknowledged the plausibility of the Petitioner's economically-depressed-area argument (citing Dhanasar's 'economically depressed area' language) but still found it insufficient to show national-level impact; the AAO expressly reserved the second and third Dhanasar prongs under INS v. Bagamasbad after finding prong one dispositive.
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. 204.5(k)(2)
- USCIS Policy Manual F.5(D)(1)
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