dismissedNOV292023_06B52032023-11-29 · 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 planned to work as a human resources and talent management consultant through her own U.S. company, implementing a program focused on managing hotel employees and serving the U.S. hotel industry.
Field: human resources / hotel industry consulting · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“the [P]etitioner's proposed endeavor ... has not established that her proposed endeavor has implications beyond her current employer”
“the generalized information in the record that the Petitioner references on appeal are immaterial to determining whether the proposed endeavor may have national importance”
“the record does not quantify the extent to which the proposed endeavor will "contribute to" those industrywide economic estimates”
“The document in the record ... appears to be a PowerPoint presentation written in a language other than English ... it contains pedagogical information, not the type of plans to operate a business that a business plan would contain”
“the record does not establish that the specific endeavor that the Petitioner proposes to undertake has national importance”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- business plan · discounted
“The translated document indicates that it is a "training program," not a business plan”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“both images of a signature appear to be identical, fuzzy and pixelated, light gray boxes not matching the white color”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“generalized information in the record that the Petitioner references on appeal are immaterial to determining whether the proposed endeavor may have national importance”
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
- Employer-specific benefit · p1 — "work furthers my company's product" — value accrues to one firm
- 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 raised significant doubt about the authenticity of two RFE-response documents due to identical, fuzzy, pixelated signature images inconsistent with page background, invoking Matter of Ho to discount the reliability of the entire record. The purported 'business plan' was found to actually be a training program PowerPoint, not a business plan.
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
- Matter of Ho
- Matter of L-A-C-
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