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 work as a financial manager and own/operate a financial services company offering auditing, accounting, and contract-bidding services to small and medium-sized businesses, aiming to reduce financial waste and corruption.
Field: financial auditing/accounting services · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“the record does not establish it has national importance.”
“the industry or customer base a petitioner will serve alone is not sufficient to establish national importance”
“the business plan does not provide sufficient explanation for the basis of these projections.”
“Generalized conclusory statements that do not identify a specific impact in the field have little probative value.”
“The Petitioner has not shown the broader implications of her proposed endeavor, however admirable, rise to the level of national importance.”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- business plan · discounted
“the business plan does not provide sufficient explanation for the basis of these projections”
AAO decision text - recommendation letter · discounted
“the provided letters of recommendation do not analyze the Petitioner's specific proposed endeavor or offer evidence of its impact”
AAO decision text - media · discounted
“these articles do not discuss the Petitioner's endeavor, nor do they establish how the benefits provided to her clients would result in broader national implications”
AAO decision text - resume experience · discounted
“a petitioner's expertise and record of success are considerations under Dhanasar's second prong, which shifts the focus from the proposed endeavor to the foreign national”
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
- 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
Notable
The Petitioner's initial personal statement proposed a frozen food business, but the AAO only addressed the financial auditing endeavor since the business plan and support letters pertained solely to that endeavor. The AAO reserved both the threshold EB-2 classification issue and Dhanasar prongs 2 and 3, resolving the appeal entirely on prong 1 national importance grounds.
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
- Matter of E-M-
- Matter of L-A-C-
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