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 work as marketing and property manager for his own company, providing property management services for vacation rentals and assisting foreign buyers purchasing vacation rental properties in Central Florida.
Field: vacation rental property management · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — not met
The Petitioner did not establish that he possesses a foreign degree equivalent to a U.S. advanced degree or bachelor's degree; the record lacked a credentials evaluation, official transcripts, and required certified translations.
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“he cannot rely upon these broad figures to demonstrate the national importance of his proposed work for C-V-H-.”
“the Petitioner has not demonstrated that the creation of l Ojobs in the I metropolitan area, with an average salary of $15,000, as well as potentially dozens of low-wage indirect jobs, would have the broader implications necessary for a showing of national importance.”
“he has not established that it would have broader implications for the industry or would have substantial positive economic effects for the area.”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- business plan · discounted
“he cannot rely upon these broad figures to demonstrate the national importance of his proposed work for C-V-H-.”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“The unsubstantiated assertions of the Petitioner's representative relating to the content of these reports...do not constitute evidence.”
AAO decision text - degree · discounted
“he has not established that he possesses a foreign degree that is equivalent to either an advanced degree or a baccalaureate degree from an accredited college or university in the United States”
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
Notable
The appeal was dismissed as moot because the Petitioner filed a duplicate motion to reconsider on the same decision, which the Director had already dismissed; AAO also provided an alternative dispositive ground on prong 1 and threshold EB-2 eligibility, reserving prongs 2 and 3 and the exceptional-ability classification.
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
- 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(2)
- 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