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 attorney and international tax consultant, sought to operate her own Florida LLC providing tax and financial consulting services to facilitate cross-border investment between the United States and Brazil.
Field: international tax and financial consulting · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — addressed
Director found threshold EB-2 advanced-degree eligibility met, but AAO noted unresolved inconsistencies in employment letters documenting five years of progressive experience, which the Petitioner will need to address in any future motion or petition; not treated as a present failure.
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“a letter that primarily addresses the importance of the Petitioner's industry and profession by generally explaining why tax experts and financial consultants are beneficial to U.S. businesses”
“statements about the occupation or the field in general do not establish how the specific proposed endeavor stands to impact the broader field or otherwise establish its national importance”
“the record does not contain sufficient evidence to reflect that the area where it will operate is economically depressed, that it would employ a significant population of workers in the area”
“However, these statements are not supported by financial projections.”
“the record does not sufficiently show that such benefits, either individually or cumulatively, would rise to the level of national importance”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- recommendation letter · discounted
“statements about the occupation or the field in general do not establish how the specific proposed endeavor stands to impact the broader field”
AAO decision text - business plan · discounted
“the record does not contain sufficient evidence to reflect that the area where it will operate is economically depressed”
AAO decision text - media · discounted
“does not support that the creation of eight additional jobs in this sector or the expected tax revenue generated by the company will have a substantial economic benefit”
AAO decision text - resume experience · discounted
“there are no other references to this firm in the record, which undermines the probative value of the submitted employment letter”
AAO decision text - degree · 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
Notable
AAO identifies unresolved inconsistencies in employment letters supporting the threshold advanced-degree finding (including an unexplained six-year employer never mentioned elsewhere in the record) but declines to disturb the Director's favorable threshold determination, instead flagging the issue for any future motion or petition.
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)
- Matter of Caron Int'l
- Matter of D-R-
- Matter of Ho
- Matter of L-A-C-
- Poursina v. USCIS
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