dismissedMAR202025_05B52032025-03-20 · 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, a software developer with DevOps/cloud computing experience, proposed to establish a consultancy delivering cloud migration, infrastructure optimization, data security, and training services to mid-to-large enterprises.
Field: cloud computing / software development · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“this evidence does not sufficiently demonstrate how the cloud computing industry or his employment would have a broader impact on these fields at a national level”
“the record does not establish that the Petitioner's consultancy would impact the cloud computing industry more broadly, beyond the Petitioner's future customers.”
“merely working in an important field does not necessarily establish the national importance of the proposed endeavor.”
“the shortages of qualified workers are directly addressed by the U.S. Department of Labor through the labor certification process.”
“it is unclear how the proposed endeavor would reach the level of "substantial positive economic effects" as contemplated by Dhanasar.”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- recommendation letter · discounted
“the letters do not sufficiently detail how the Petitioner's proposed endeavor would have a broader impact on the cloud computing or technology industries”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“it does not mention the Petitioner or consider his specific proposed endeavor”
AAO decision text - business plan · discounted
“it lacks sufficient probative details to meet the standard of proof in this case”
AAO decision text
Where this case turned
- Economic claims unsupported · p1 — job/revenue projections with no corroborating basis
- Employer-specific benefit · p1 — "work furthers my company's product" — value accrues to one firm
- 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
- Occupational shortage argument rejected · p1 — argues a labor shortage — the labor-certification question, not Dhanasar
2,501coded 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 agreed with the Director that substantial merit was met, isolating the failure to national importance alone; it also reclassified the Petitioner's recommendation-letter evidence as more properly belonging to prong two, even though prong two was never reached.
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
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