dismissedJUN172024_05B52032024-06-17 · 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 planned to operate a real estate investment consultancy connecting Brazilian and Portuguese foreign investors with U.S. real estate developers to finance new housing and construction projects.
Field: real estate investment consultancy · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“the business plan is not supported by objective evidence to demonstrate how his company would have a prospective national impact on the field or on an economy of any scale”
“that reasoning is speculative and not based on any objective evidence related to his specific proposed endeavor”
“we focus on "the specific endeavor that the foreign national proposes to undertake"”
“it is not clear how a business employing twenty people by its fifth year of operation would positively impact a given region”
“fluctuating opportunities within the general labor market do not demonstrate that the Petitioner's endeavor stands to have an impact on the real estate industry”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- business plan · discounted
“the business plan is not supported by objective evidence to demonstrate how his company would have a prospective national impact”
AAO decision text - media · discounted
“does not provide insight into his plan to operate a real estate investment consultancy company or show how this specific endeavor would have a potential prospective impact”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“he has not shown that these general statistics on a broad category of economic activities substantiate the national importance of his proposed endeavor”
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
- 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
- Occupational shortage argument rejected · p1 — argues a labor shortage — the labor-certification question, not Dhanasar
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
The Petitioner argued his endeavor aligned with White House affordable-housing initiatives, but the AAO rejected this as insufficient to show national importance of the specific endeavor rather than the broader policy goal; decision also cites a Fifth Circuit case (Flores v. Garland) confirming the discretionary nature of NIW adjudication.
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.
- 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