dismissedMAR142024_06B52032024-03-14 · 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 planned to start a business in Texas providing risk-management consultancy services to small businesses and selling insurance policies to individual clients.
Field: insurance / risk-management consultancy · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — addressed
Director found, and record supports, that Petitioner qualifies as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree; not disputed on appeal.
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“the Director determined that the Petitioner had not demonstrated that his business would employ a significant population of workers in the locality where he intends to operate”
“shortages in a field do not demonstrate that the Petitioner's endeavor stands to have an impact on the broader field”
“users cannot conflate the importance of a field with the national importance of a petitioner's proposed endeavor”
“The Petitioner's statements and business plan outline generalized descriptions of the services that the Petitioner intends to provide”
“These statements and the business plan, however, and are not supported by probative evidence to demonstrate his claims”
“the record does not show that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor stands to sufficiently extend beyond his company and its clientele”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- business plan · discounted
“generalized descriptions...are not supported by probative evidence to demonstrate his claims”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“users cannot conflate the importance of a field with the national importance of a petitioner's proposed endeavor”
AAO decision text
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
- 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
- Local, not national scope · p1 — impact confined to clients / a region
- Occupational shortage argument rejected · p1 — argues a labor shortage — the labor-certification question, not Dhanasar
1,358coded 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 expressly declined to reach prongs 2 and 3 after finding prong 1 dispositive; noted the Petitioner failed to identify any erroneous conclusion in the Director's decision as required by 8 C.F.R. 103.3(a)(1)(v).
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-
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