dismissedMAR222024_04B52032024-03-22 · 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 proposed to direct and oversee a Florida-based construction and real estate company focused on building reasonably priced homes, offering services including new construction, renovation, real estate sales, property development, consulting, and inspection.
Field: construction and real estate · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“we conclude that the record does not establish that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor is of national importance.”
“the record does not specifically show how the Petitioner's construction and real estate company will meet his goals of affordable housing”
“the proposed number ofjobs do not rise to the level of national importance.”
“the record does not establish that the proposed endeavor will impact the construction and real estate industry in a broader sense, impacting more than just the Petitioner's client base.”
“the Petitioner improperly relies upon the importance of the industry to establish the national importance of his proposed endeavor.”
“the record does not quantify any "ripple effects" that would be directly attributable to his endeavor”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- business plan · discounted
“the record does not specifically show how the Petitioner's construction and real estate company will meet his goals”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“the Petitioner improperly relies upon the importance of the industry to establish the national importance of his proposed endeavor”
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
- 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
AAO noted the business plan's job-creation figures were internally inconsistent (7 direct jobs/1st year on appeal vs. 3 in original business plan), but found either version insufficient for national importance regardless of the discrepancy.
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
- 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