dismissedJUN162022_01B52032022-06-16 · 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 proposed to continue working as a postsecondary education administrator, operating through a company she founded that holds an interest in an educational consultancy/ESL learning facility, coordinating activities to meet demand in the U.S. education services industry.
Field: postsecondary education administration / education consultancy · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“the totality of evidence does not establish the national importance of the [P]etitioner' s proposed endeavor.”
“the record does not establish how the endeavor will rise to the level of having "national or even global implications within a particular field”
“the record does not establish that employing those 14 workers and generating 29 indirect jobs would have substantial positive economic effects”
“the Petitioner's discussion of the role of academic administrators in general and her discussion of education trends in general do not address the "specific endeavor”
“it would appear that the proposed endeavor may benefit its subsidiaries, and its students.”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- business plan · discounted
“the record does not establish that employing those 14 workers and generating 29 indirect jobs would have substantial positive economic effects”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“that statement on appeal presents a new set of facts that cannot establish eligibility.”
AAO decision text - resume experience · ignored
“The Petitioner's discussion of her qualifications and prior career accomplishments relate to the second Dhanasar prong”
AAO decision text
Where this case turned
- Economic claims unsupported · p1 — job/revenue projections with no corroborating basis
- Employer-specific benefit · p1 — "work furthers my company's product" — value accrues to one firm
- 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
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 found new arguments raised on appeal (cross-border understanding with Latin American students) constituted an impermissible new set of facts under Katigbak, since not previously part of the record.
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. 103.2(b)(1)
- Matter of Katigbak
- 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