dismissedNOV222024_03B52032024-11-22 · combined · Nebraska 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 sought to create a U.S. company offering travel-related services, including an online travel portal, with plans to grow from five to fifteen employees over five years.
Field: travel and tourism · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“the Petitioner has not provided sufficient information and evidence to demonstrate the benefit of opening a travel and tourism company has broader implications”
“the Petitioner's general assertions regarding the contributions her proposed endeavor will make to the national economy... are insufficient to demonstrate that her proposed endeavor would have national economic impact”
“the Petitioner's evidence does not establish that the projected revenue or number of jobs expected to be created by her proposed endeavor... would have substantial positive economic effects”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- business plan · discounted
“the unsupported projections in her business plan and generalized conclusions in the expert opinion letter, are insufficient”
AAO decision text - recommendation letter · discounted
“These submissions generally speak to the Petitioner's character and business experience, and the importance of small businesses”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“generally speak to... the importance of small businesses, entrepreneurship, and the travel and tourism industry”
AAO decision text - motion resubmission · ignored
“we need not address this because as stated here, the record, including the new recommendation letters, is insufficient”
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
- 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
1,312coded 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
AAO disagreed with the Director's refusal to consider new recommendation letters on motion as untimely, but found the point moot since the letters were substantively insufficient regardless.
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. 103.5
- Flores v. Garland
- 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