dismissedMAY012025_03B52032025-05-01 · motion_reconsider · 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 human resources director, proposed to operate an HR consulting or services business in the United States, asserting that her work would substantially benefit the U.S. economy, particularly small businesses.
Field: human resources / HR consulting · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“we determined the Petitioner did not establish the national importance of her proposed endeavor”
“we specifically explained why the Petitioner's business plan and expert opinion letter were insufficient to establish the national importance of her proposed endeavor”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- business plan · discounted
“the Petitioner's business plan and expert opinion letter were insufficient to establish the national importance of her proposed endeavor”
AAO decision text - recommendation letter · discounted
“the Petitioner's business plan and expert opinion letter were insufficient to establish the national importance of her proposed endeavor”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“The Director considered all this evidence and acknowledged it in her decision denying the petition.”
AAO decision text - motion resubmission · discounted
“a motion to reconsider is not a process by which a party may submit, in essence, the same brief presented on appeal and seek reconsideration by generally alleging error”
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
- 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
This is the petitioner's third motion to reconsider following an initial denial, a dismissed appeal, and two prior dismissed motions to reconsider — an unusually protracted procedural history. The AAO declined to reach prongs 2 and 3, having found prong 1 (national importance) dispositive at the appeal stage. The motion was dismissed on procedural grounds as rearguing previously considered facts, citing Matter of O-S-G-.
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