dismissedMAR292024_02B52032024-03-29 · 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 special education teacher, sought to open a special education support office in Florida providing psychopedagogical support, consultancy on adapting materials for special education, and lectures on educating children with special needs.
Field: special education · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“the Petitioner has not shown her proposed endeavor stands to sufficiently extend its benefits beyond her immediate students and customers to enhance societal welfare on a broader scale indicative of national importance.”
“she has not presented evidence indicating that the benefits to the regional or national economies resulting from her undertaking would reach the level of "substantial positive economic effects" contemplated by Dhanasar.”
“The Petitioner has not shown that the specific endeavor she proposes to undertake has significant potential to employ U.S. workers or otherwise offers substantial positive economic effects for the United States.”
“It is insufficient to claim an endeavor has national importance or will create a broad impact without providing evidence to corroborate such claims.”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- recommendation letter · discounted
“the letter does not specify the types of services that the Petitioner will provide to the nonprofit as a special education teacher and business owner.”
AAO decision text - business plan · discounted
“the Petitioner has not offered sufficient information and evidence to demonstrate that the prospective impact of her proposed endeavor rises to the level of national importance.”
AAO decision text - contract revenue · discounted
“she has not presented evidence indicating that the benefits to the regional or national economies resulting from her undertaking would reach the level of "substantial positive economic effects" contemplated by Dhanasar.”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“the record does not include adequate corroborating evidence, to show that the Petitioner's specific proposed work as a special educator offers broader implications in her field”
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
- 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
The Director's decision contained an error referencing a 'systems and computer engineering' industry instead of special education, which the AAO acknowledged but deemed harmless because prong one failed regardless.
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
- INA 203(b)(2)
- Matter of L-A-C-
Cases in adjacent profiles
- The Petitioner, an assistant professor of Arabic, proposed to continue teaching Levantine-Modern Standard Arabic to U.S.
- The Petitioner, a secondary school teacher, proposed to develop and implement an open educational resource program to ex
- The Petitioner proposed to establish a consulting company in Missouri to design and implement a nationally adaptable tea
- The Petitioner, an arts, drama, and music teacher and entrepreneur, sought EB-2 classification as an individual of excep
- The petitioner, a mathematics teacher with 17 years of experience, proposed to operate a company offering online math tu