dismissedMAR252026_05B52032026-03-25 · appeal

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 management analyst, proposed to reduce small-business closure rates in underserved U.S. areas through a two-pronged consultancy model combining strategic guidance and data-driven marketing/sales frameworks, while also teaching basic entrepreneurship concepts at local high schools and mentoring one student.

Field: business/management consulting · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“SCOPS found that the Petitioner established the substantial merit of his proposed endeavor but not its national importance to demonstrate Dhanasar 's first prong.”

“in determining national importance, we do not focus on the importance of the field, industry, or profession in which the individual will work but on the specific endeavor”

“The Petitioner did not specifically explain or show how his proposed endeavor would have significant potential to employ U.S. workers or otherwise offer substantial positive economic effects for our nation.”

“SCOPS also properly found the Petitioner did not show how his consultancy services would largely influence the field and rise to the level of national importance.”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

business plan · discounted
“The Petitioner did not explain in the record below, or now on appeal, how his methods ... would improve upon those already available”
AAO decision text
other · discounted
“do not discuss the Petitioner's proposed endeavor and, without more, do not support his endeavor's national importance.”
AAO decision text
certification membership · ignored

Where this case turned

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

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 reserved analysis of prongs 2 and 3 after finding prong 1 dispositive, citing Bagamasbad and Matter of L-A-C- for declining to reach unnecessary alternative issues; AAO summarily rejected the Petitioner's general claims of procedural deficiency and arbitrary/unreasonable decision-making as insufficiently explained.

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-

What this case teaches

Analyst reading of the decision text.

Decisive factor

Petitioner failed to show his specific consultancy methods (vs. field generally) would have national/global implications or substantial positive economic effects beyond his own clients, especially without data-driven proof.

Transferable lesson

Tie the specific endeavor's methodology to quantifiable, evidence-backed national/regional economic or field-wide impact—generic assertions of job creation or underserved-area benefit are insufficient.

Endeavor framing

moderate

National-importance theory

economic_job_creation · economic_growth_generic · field_advancement · geographic_or_shortage_area

Evidence targeting

person_focused

Cases in adjacent profiles

← Back to the case explorer