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 create a consulting, sales advisory, and channel management services company serving the construction, furniture, home appliances, and school/office supply industries in Florida, assisting companies with sales force effectiveness and efficiency.
Field: consulting, sales advisory, and channel management services · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“we agree with the Director's determination that the Petitioner has not demonstrated his proposed endeavor's national importance”
“the Petitioner has not shown that his company's future staffing levels, business activity, or related tax revenue stand to provide substantial positive economic effects”
“he has not demonstrated how his company would be distinct from any other similar, small business operating in the United States such that it would stand to broadly impact”
“The Petitioner has not detailed how the claimed creation of 8 direct jobs and 16.608 indirect jobs by Year 5 demonstrates a significant potential to employ U.S. workers”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- business plan · discounted
“he has not demonstrated how his company would be distinct from any other similar, small business operating in the United States”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“we would still conclude that the Petitioner has not adequately explained how these staffing levels and associated economic or social impact would be substantial”
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
Notable
Petitioner used Economic Policy Institute employment multiplier data to argue indirect job creation (207.6 indirect jobs per 100 direct jobs), which the AAO found insufficiently substantial despite crediting the calculation arithmetic. Petitioner also raised a procedural argument that the Director failed to follow USCIS Policy Manual guidance in reviewing evidence, which AAO rejected as unsubstantiated.
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 L-A-C-
What this case teaches
Analyst reading of the decision text.
Petitioner failed to show his small consulting business's projected job creation (8 direct, 16.6 indirect jobs) or regional economic effects were substantial enough to constitute national importance, even if credited as true.
Quantify projected impact against regional/national economic baselines and explain why the scale—not mere existence—of job creation or economic effect rises to national importance.
moderate
economic_job_creation · geographic_or_shortage_area
endeavor_focused
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