dismissedMAY092024_02B52032024-05-09 · 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 computer engineer, proposed to develop consulting, support, and cybersecurity services for financial companies (e.g., credit unions) to help them comply with best practices and secure sensitive financial information.
Field: IT consulting / cybersecurity · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — addressed
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“the Petitioner improperly relies upon the importance of the industry to establish the national importance of her proposed endeavor”
“The record does not establish a prospective broader impact with this number of workers and therefore does not rise to the level of national importance.”
“the Petitioner has not established that her proposed endeavor would have enough of an economic impact through employment of U.S. workers or other economic impacts to rise to the level of national importance”
“it does not show how her services will impact the field more broadly to have national or global implications”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- other · discounted
“working in an important field is insufficient to establish the national importance of the proposed endeavor”
AAO decision text - business plan · discounted
“The record does not establish a prospective broader impact with this number of workers”
AAO decision text - degree · credited
- resume experience · credited
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
Petitioner argued the Director's decision constituted an 'abuse of discretion' and questioned USCIS's guidance on industry reports as evidence; AAO rejected both arguments and decided the case entirely on prong 1's national importance element without reaching prongs 2 or 3.
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
- 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(2)
- Flores v. Garland
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