dismissedMAR132024_06B52032024-03-13 · appeal · Nebraska 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 sought to establish a technology-driven consulting firm providing networking and security solutions to U.S. businesses.

Field: network security consulting · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

EB-2 threshold — not met

AAO found the Director's finding that Petitioner qualified as an advanced-degree professional unsupported, because the credential evaluation indicated his foreign MBA equivalent came from an unaccredited institution, but this issue was not dispositive and was left for future proceedings.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“None of the articles in the record demonstrate the national importance of establishing a network security consulting firm such as the Petitioner's.”

“We therefore conclude that the Petitioner has not established the credibility of these financial projections.”

“The Petitioner has not established that the benefits of his proposed endeavor will extend beyond his own clients or employees”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

business plan · discounted
“neither the business proposal nor the "model or plan for future activities" sufficiently establishes...national importance”
AAO decision text
media · discounted
“relate to the network security industry in general, rather than the Petitioner's specific, proposed endeavor”
AAO decision text
contract revenue · discounted
“the document does not provide any basis or explanation for these numbers”
AAO decision text
degree · discounted
“the record is not sufficiently clear to establish that the Petitioner possesses a master's degree or its foreign equivalent”
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

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

AAO found the Director's underlying EB-2 eligibility determination (advanced degree) unsupported due to an unresolved foreign-degree accreditation issue, but declined to resolve it because the national-importance failure was independently dispositive; new business proposal and recommendation letters submitted on appeal were not credited as they did not cure the national importance deficiency.

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 L-A-C-

Cases in adjacent profiles

← Back to the case explorer