dismissedNOV302022_03B52032022-11-30 · 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, a financial manager/cost analyst, proposed to develop and expand his own Florida-based company offering accounting, financial advisory, consulting, and investment services to U.S. and Latin American clients.

Field: financial management/accounting · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

EB-2 threshold — addressed

Director found Petitioner qualifies as an advanced degree professional; this was not disputed on appeal.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“we conclude the Petitioner has not shown that his proposed endeavor stands to sufficiently extend beyond his employer, his company, or their clientele to impact the financial management field”

“We are not persuaded by the Petitioner's claim that his proposed endeavor has national importance due to the shortage of professionals in the financial services industry.”

“shortages of qualified workers are directly addressed by the U.S. Department of Labor through the labor certification process”

“he did not elaborate on these projections or provide evidence supporting the need for these additional employees”

“he has not offered sufficient evidence that the area where his company operates is economically depressed, that he would employ a significant population of workers in that area”

“In determining national importance, the relevant question is not the importance of the field, industry, or profession in which the individual will work”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

business plan · discounted
“he did not adequately explain how these sales forecasts were calculated”
AAO decision text
recommendation letter · discounted
“do not contain sufficient information and explanation ... to show that his proposed work offers broader implications”
AAO decision text
other · discounted
“The record therefore shows that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor has substantial merit.”
AAO decision text
contract revenue · discounted
“it does not demonstrate that the benefits to the regional or national economy resulting from his undertaking would reach the level of substantial positive economic effects”
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
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
Occupational shortage argument rejected · p1 — argues a labor shortage — the labor-certification question, not Dhanasar

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 explicitly credited the endeavor with 'substantial merit' based on extensive industry articles but found national importance lacking, illustrating the merit/importance split within prong 1; decision expressly states the dismissal is on an independent and alternate basis.

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
Section 291 of the Act

Cases in adjacent profiles

← Back to the case explorer