dismissedMAY072024_02B52032024-05-07 · 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 sought to operate her own marketing and communications consultancy providing branding and marketing services to U.S. small and medium-sized businesses, and to teach entrepreneurs neuropsychological (emotional) marketing techniques through workshops and courses.
Field: marketing and communications / branding consultancy · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“the Petitioner has not shown her proposed endeavor stands to sufficiently extend beyond her customers to enhance societal welfare on a broader scale indicative of national importance”
“the record does not support the Petitioner's general assertions with corroborating evidence demonstrating the plausibility of those assertions”
“Without sufficient information or evidence regarding any projected U.S. economic impact or job creation attributable to her future work, the record does not indicate that the benefits to the regional or national economy resulting from the Petitioner's proposed endeavor would reach the level of "substantial positive economic effects"”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- recommendation letter · discounted
“the record does not include adequate corroborating evidence, to show that the Petitioner's specific proposed endeavor offers broader implications in her field”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“the lack of detail in the Petitioner's projections makes it difficult to determine how the Petitioner's proposed endeavor differs from that of other entrepreneurs”
AAO decision text - business plan · discounted
“the record does not support the Petitioner's general assertions with corroborating evidence demonstrating the plausibility of those assertions”
AAO decision text
Where this case turned
- Economic claims unsupported · p1 — job/revenue projections with no corroborating basis
- Endeavor too vague · p1 — described as a job role, not a defined undertaking
- Local, not national scope · p1 — impact confined to clients / a region
2,589coded 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 record included an 'expert opinion letter' specifically emphasizing national importance of emotional marketing, and the Petitioner argued the Director 'arbitrarily and capriciously ignored' this expert opinion; the AAO did not directly address the arbitrary-and-capricious claim but reaffirmed the insufficiency of the overall evidentiary showing.
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-
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