dismissedJUN182024_09B52032024-06-18 · 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, a business administrator with experience in sales, marketing, and distribution in Colombia, proposed to provide business consulting and management services to small and medium-sized U.S. companies and entrepreneurs.
Field: business administration / consulting · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — addressed
Director found and AAO confirmed Petitioner qualifies as advanced degree professional based on business administration degree, one year graduate study, and 25 years of progressive experience.
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“he has not offered any other information and evidence to demonstrate that the prospective impact of his proposed endeavor rises to the level of national importance”
“the letter does not indicate where the business is located or other information about the company and its business that would help identify the scope of the company's current or intended activity”
“we find the record does not show that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor stands to sufficiently extend beyond his potential employers and clientele to impact the business administration field or U.S. economy more broadly”
“the record does not show that benefits to the U.S. regional or national economy resulting from the Petitioner's business consulting projects would reach the level of "substantial positive economic effects"”
AAO decision text
Prong 2 — well positionednot established · dispositive
“simply having education, skills, and/or knowledge does not place a petitioner in a position to advance their proposed endeavor”
“the record does not reflect he has made any progress to achieving the proposed endeavor in a manner sufficient for us to evaluate how well positioned he is to advance it”
“the competent execution of past job duties, even successfully, does not automatically render a petitioner well positioned to advance their proposed endeavor”
“the evidence in the record does not sufficiently describe how well situated the Petitioner would be to advance his proposed endeavor”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- recommendation letter · discounted
“does not automatically render a petitioner well positioned to advance their proposed endeavor”
AAO decision text - resume experience · discounted
“the competent execution of past job duties, even successfully, does not automatically render a petitioner well positioned”
AAO decision text - business plan · discounted
“the record does not reflect he has made any progress to achieving the proposed endeavor”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“does not contain information showing ... where the potential client is located, the size of the company, the nature and scope of its operations”
AAO decision text - media · ignored
All 7 evidence items
- degree · credited
- motion resubmission · discounted
“The Petitioner does not include new evidence on appeal, instead requesting that his previously provided evidence be considered.”
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
- Education alone insufficient · p2 — degrees offered as positioning — credentials are not a track record
- Letters conclusory · p2 — letters praise skills in general terms without tracing specific impact
- No progress evidence · p2 — no documented movement toward the endeavor since filing
- Record of success insufficient · p2 — a claimed track record the documents do not establish
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 withdrew the Director's favorable finding on prong 2 sua sponte, providing an additional, independent basis for dismissal beyond prong 1. Petitioner cited Matter of Buletini to argue Director failed to consider all evidence, which AAO did not directly address but proceeded with de novo review anyway.
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
- Matter of L-A-C-
- Matter of Y-B-
Cases in adjacent profiles
- The Petitioner proposed to work as an IT consultant in the United States, providing cybersecurity and digital transforma
- The petitioner proposed to establish his own company providing specialized business consultancy, auditing, and training
- The petitioner proposed to work as a consultant engineer through his own company, specializing in development projects t
- The Petitioner proposed to start a project management consultancy in the United States that would help small and mid-siz
- The Petitioner proposed to establish a legal consultancy in the United States focused on alternative dispute resolution