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 establish and operate a residential (and, per her business plan, also commercial/school) cleaning business in the United States, which she argued would help prevent disease outbreaks like COVID-19.
Field: residential/commercial cleaning services · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — addressed
Petitioner qualified as an advanced degree professional based on a bachelor's degree plus more than eight years of progressive business experience.
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“The Petitioner has not demonstrated that her specific proposal has national implications.”
“The record does not indicate that the Petitioner's business would introduce cleaning processes or products that would advance disease prevention.”
“But she has not established the national or regional significance of that impact or its occurrence in an economically depressed area.”
“But, without evidence of broader implications for the country or the disease-prevention field, the record does not establish that the Petitioner's specific proposal rises to the level of national importance.”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- business plan · discounted
“The Petitioner's business plan, if credible, projects that, in its fifth operational year, her proposed company would employ seven people”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“The record does not indicate that the Petitioner's business would introduce cleaning processes or products that would advance disease prevention.”
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
Notable
The AAO analogized the case to Dhanasar itself, comparing the petitioner's cleaning-business/disease-prevention argument to the STEM-teaching endeavor rejected in Dhanasar for lacking broader field-wide impact despite substantial merit.
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. 204.5(k)(2)
Cases in adjacent profiles
- The Beneficiary proposed to establish an asset investment management and compliance advisory firm in New York offering c
- The Petitioner proposed to develop and commercialize zeolite-based products in the United States, including agricultural
- The Petitioner proposed to operate a medical billing and healthcare revenue cycle management firm in the United States,
- The Petitioner proposed to establish and lead as CEO a cybersecurity and crisis management company in Florida, offering
- The Petitioner proposed to establish and operate an IT consultancy company in Michigan providing cloud migration, cybers