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/consultant in the real estate industry, acquiring off-market distressed and foreclosure properties, remodeling and reselling them through his Florida-based company, while also initially proposing to operate a mobile/digital device repair franchise.
Field: real estate / business and financial management · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — addressed
Director found Petitioner qualifies as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree; this was not disputed on appeal.
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“the relevant question is not the importance of the industry, field, or profession in which an individual will work”
“The various publications regarding the real estate industry in general do not establish how the "specific endeavor that the [noncitizen] proposes to undertake" may have "national or even global implications”
“the record does not elaborate on how employing eight individuals in those primarily clerical and customer service roles at that income level rises to the level of broader implications”
“the record does not establish how the endeavor's approach to acquiring real estate property, remodeling the property, and reselling it, differs from other operations that do the same”
“The record does not substantiate those claims.”
“Without more details, such as trends in the market values of the properties in question before and after the Petitioner's real estate company remodels them”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- business plan · discounted
“the record does not establish how the proposed endeavor will have national or even global implications within a particular field”
AAO decision text - recommendation letter · discounted
“the opinion letters do not establish how the specific endeavor that the noncitizen proposes to undertake may have national importance”
AAO decision text - media · discounted
“they address the industry, field, or profession in which the Petitioner will work, which... are inapposite”
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
- 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 had abandoned the digital device repair franchise aspect of the endeavor in response to the NOID but revived it on appeal without explaining its relation to the real estate endeavor; AAO addressed both but found neither established national importance, individually or in the aggregate.
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
- INA 203(b)(2)
- 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