dismissedNOV272020_06B52032020-11-27 · appeal · Texas 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 start a consulting firm in Florida to provide advisory services to property management companies and other small businesses in the property management, construction, and hospitality sectors.
Field: marketing and general management / small business consulting · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“the record does not show that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor stands to sufficiently extend beyond her company and its future clientele to impact the small business consulting field, the property management industry, or the U.S. or Florida economy more broadly”
“the Petitioner has not demonstrated that the specific endeavor she proposes to undertake has significant potential to employ U.S. workers or otherwise offers substantial positive economic effects”
“The Petitioner, however, does not adequately explain how these staffing and revenue forecasts were calculated.”
“The research provided relates to the marketing and consulting industries, entrepreneurship, and U.S. and Florida small business data in general rather than the implications associated with the Petitioner's particular proposed endeavor.”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- business plan · discounted
“does not adequately explain how these staffing and revenue forecasts were calculated”
AAO decision text - recommendation letter · discounted
“contends that the Petitioner's proposed work has national importance due to the size of the industry”
AAO decision text - contract revenue · discounted
- other · discounted
“relates to the marketing and consulting industries, entrepreneurship, and U.S. and Florida small business data in general rather than the implications associated with the Petitioner's particular proposed endeavor”
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
- Local, not national scope · p1 — impact confined to clients / a region
1,358coded 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
Explicitly frames the dismissal as resting on an independent and alternate basis, though only prong 1 was actually analyzed; heavy use of general industry research (SBA, SCORE, Florida economic data) that AAO distinguished from endeavor-specific impact.
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.
- Poursina v. USCIS
Cases in adjacent profiles
- The Petitioner proposed to work as an IT consultant in the United States, providing cybersecurity and digital transforma
- The petitioner proposed to establish his own company providing specialized business consultancy, auditing, and training
- The petitioner proposed to work as a consultant engineer through his own company, specializing in development projects t
- The Petitioner proposed to start a project management consultancy in the United States that would help small and mid-siz
- The Petitioner proposed to establish a legal consultancy in the United States focused on alternative dispute resolution