dismissedMAR102022_02B52032022-03-10 · 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, an accountant who founded her own Florida-based accounting services company, proposed to provide bookkeeping, tax planning, and consulting services to U.S. companies, including those doing business with Brazil.
Field: accounting · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“the record does not show that the Petitioner' s proposed endeavor stands to sufficiently extend beyond her company and its clientele to impact the accounting field or the U. S. economy more broadly”
“she has not shown that her company's future staffing levels and business activity stand to provide substantial economic benefits in Florida or the United States”
“she did not elaborate on these projections or provide evidence supporting the need for these additional employees”
“she did not adequately explain how these sales forecasts were calculated”
“the relevant question is not the importance of the field, industry, or profession in which the individual will work”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- business plan · discounted
“she did not elaborate on these projections or provide evidence supporting the need for these additional employees”
AAO decision text - recommendation letter · discounted
“relate to the second prong of the Dhanasar framework... The issue here is whether the specific endeavor... has national importance”
AAO decision text - contract revenue · discounted
“it does not demonstrate that the benefits to the regional or national economy resulting from the Petitioner's undertaking would reach the level of "substantial positive economic effects"”
AAO decision text - other · credited
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
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 AAO found substantial merit was established but national importance was not; the record included general field-outlook articles (accounting industry trends, IRS resources) which the AAO treated as evidence of the field's importance rather than the specific endeavor's importance.
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.
- Section 291 of the Act
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