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 CEO/marketing consultant of her own digital marketing company in California, serving small and medium-sized U.S. businesses and Brazilian businesses seeking to expand into the U.S. market.
Field: digital marketing consulting · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — addressed
Director found, and AAO did not disturb, that Petitioner qualified as an advanced degree professional.
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“The Petitioner relies primarily on the importance of the digital marketing industry for small and medium-sized businesses in the United States”
“merely working in an important field or profession is insufficient to establish the national importance of the Petitioner's proposed endeavor”
“these revenue and employment projections are not supported by details showing their basis or an explanation of how they will be realized”
“Generalized conclusory statements that do not identify a specific impact to the field and do not demonstrate the prospective impact directly attributable to the proposed endeavor have little probative value”
“this claim is based upon the Regional Input-Output Modeling System, a regional economic model which is a tool used by investors, planners, and elected officials”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- business plan · discounted
“these revenue and employment projections are not supported by details showing their basis or an explanation of how they will be realized”
AAO decision text - contract revenue · discounted
“while the Petitioner's company may stimulate economic activity at some level, it is the Petitioner's burden to show that the economic effects... will be substantial”
AAO decision text - recommendation letter · ignored
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
Notable
AAO rejected use of RIMS II regional economic modeling as inapt for projecting impact of a nascent marketing consulting business, distinguishing it from its intended use for larger regional projects.
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
- Flores v. Garland
- Matter of L-A-C-
What this case teaches
Analyst reading of the decision text.
A $35,000 self-funded startup projecting $9.63M revenue and 156 jobs by year five, with RIMS II multipliers borrowed to claim a $21.73M ripple, had no corroborating basis; industry articles proved the field mattered, not her company.
Projections must be arithmetic someone can check: seed capital, staffing, and clients that plausibly produce the claimed revenue; RIMS II applied to a nascent consultancy is a red flag.
moderate
economic_job_creation · economic_growth_generic
endeavor_focused
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