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 a cybersecurity specialist, educator, and consultant, applying his training to design and develop security strategies to improve the cybersecurity posture of U.S. companies.
Field: cybersecurity · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — addressed
AAO noted ambiguity about whether the Petitioner's Costa Rican 'Maestria Profesional' and 'bachillerato' credentials equate to U.S. master's/bachelor's degrees, but reserved the issue since the appeal was dismissed on prong 1 grounds.
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“the importance of an endeavor is determined not by the industry or occupation it involves, but by the Petitioner's specific proposed endeavor's prospective impact”
“The evidence in the record does not support the conclusion that the proposed endeavor will extend beyond an organization, the Petitioner's employer, and its clients to impact the field of cybersecurity generally.”
“The Petitioner has not submitted a business plan to illustrate in detail his proposed endeavor.”
“the letters "do not meaningfully discuss the Petitioner's proposed endeavor" in order to establish how it might meet the standard of national importance”
“Based on the evidence of record, the Petitioner's proposed endeavor ofbeing a cybersecurity specialist, educator, and consultant is too amorphous to meet his burden of proof”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- recommendation letter · discounted
“the letters do not meaningfully discuss the Petitioner's proposed endeavor”
AAO decision text - business plan · ignored
“The Petitioner has not submitted a business plan to illustrate in detail his proposed endeavor.”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“The government initiatives referenced are not specific to the Petitioner and involve cybersecurity themes generally”
AAO decision text - degree · ignored
Where this case turned
- Business plan speculative · p1 — projections without a documented basis or steps
- 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
- Letters conclusory · p1 — letters praise skills in general terms without tracing specific impact
- Occupational shortage argument rejected · p1 — argues a labor shortage — the labor-certification question, not Dhanasar
Notable
AAO declined to consider a materially different endeavor (establishing his own cybersecurity consultancy/company) first raised on appeal, citing Matter of Soriano and Matter of Izummi's prohibition on material changes not raised in response to the RFE. AAO also flagged unresolved foreign credential equivalency issues (Costa Rican 'Maestria Profesional' and 'bachillerato') but reserved them as unnecessary to the disposition.
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 Izummi
- 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