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 establish an IT security consulting company in Florida offering cybersecurity services—including risk assessment, penetration testing, incident response, and security training—to U.S. government entities and small-to-medium-sized businesses.
Field: information technology / cybersecurity consulting · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — addressed
SCOPS found the Petitioner qualifies as an advanced degree professional; AAO did not disturb this finding.
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“the record does not support its national importance.”
“the Petitioner has not shown, and the record does not illustrate, how the impact resulting from his individual company's IT security consulting services would sufficiently extend beyond his company, its clients, and the individuals he trains”
“working in an important field, including one that is the subject of national or federal priorities, is insufficient to establish the proposed endeavor's national importance.”
“he has not provided sufficient detail explaining, for example, what these activities would specifically entail, how his services are meaningfully distinguishable from those of other IT security consulting firms”
“he did not provide sufficient explanation or evidentiary support for the basis of his figures.”
“he did not demonstrate how his claimed employment and sales forecasts show a significant potential to employ U.S. workers or otherwise offers substantial positive economic effects”
“this general statistic does not equate to the Petitioner's endeavor creating the same impact.”
“the Petitioner also has not shown how his training activities would sufficiently extend beyond the individuals he trains to affect the region or our nation more broadly”
“the fact that a proposed endeavor may be in a STEM field is not dispositive in and of itself.”
“the expert opinion letters state that by offering IT security services at affordable rates, the Petitioner's company 'not only protects the companies themselves but also strengthens the broader economic ecosystem'”
“neither letter provides sufficient detail or explanation as to how the Petitioner's company, in particular, would specifically accomplish these broad objectives”
“these expert opinion and other recommendation letters are of limited probative value in establishing the endeavor's national importance.”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- other · discounted
“they do not establish with specificity how the Petitioner's work would extend beyond his company, clients, and trainees to impact these areas more broadly”
AAO decision text - business plan · discounted
“he did not provide sufficient explanation or evidentiary support for the basis of his figures.”
AAO decision text - recommendation letter · discounted
“The letters are largely conclusory in nature and do not provide a sufficient, evidentiary basis for their claims.”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“this general statistic does not equate to the Petitioner's endeavor creating the same impact.”
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
- Employer-specific benefit · p1 — "work furthers my company's product" — value accrues to one firm
- Field importance conflated with endeavor · p1 — argues the field matters, not the specific endeavor
- Letters conclusory · p1 — letters praise skills in general terms without tracing specific impact
- 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
Notable
The AAO reversed SCOPS on prong 1, finding national importance not established even though SCOPS had found it met; the AAO then declined to reach prongs 2 and 3. The decision includes an extended analogy to Dhanasar's classroom-teacher example to reject the cybersecurity workforce-shortage argument, and explicitly notes that STEM field status is not dispositive for national importance.
What this case teaches
Analyst reading of the decision text.
On de novo review AAO withdrew SCOPS's favorable prong-1 finding: undistinguished consulting services, unsupported projections, a borrowed IBM statistic, trainee-bounded training, and conclusory letters failed national importance.
A favorable officer finding can be withdrawn on appeal; distinguish your services from the industry's, and never claim an industry-wide statistic as your endeavor's own impact.
moderate
national_security · economic_job_creation · government_interest
mixed
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