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 establish and operate an integrated pest control management business in Florida, using ecosystem-based strategies such as biological control, habitat manipulation, and limited pesticide use.
Field: pest control management / biological sciences · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — not met
AAO disagreed with the Director's finding that Petitioner established five years of progressive experience; letters and certificates documented the existence of his Brazilian company but not his own job duties/experience. However, this did not affect the outcome since the appeal was dismissed on prong 1 grounds.
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“the relevant consideration is the "specific endeavor that the [noncitizen] proposes to undertake," rather than the importance of the industry, field, or profession.”
“the Petitioner has not established that the benefits of his proposed pest control company will extend beyond his own customers and employees to impact the industry more broadly.”
“the Petitioner does not demonstrate on appeal that his proposed endeavor in integrated pest control management relates to or has the potential to result in progress for a critical and emerging technology or national security”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- business plan · discounted
“it did not demonstrate the importance of endeavor to the United States”
AAO decision text - resume experience · discounted
“they do not describe the Petitioner's own job duties and experience”
AAO decision text - certification membership · discounted
“they do not describe the Petitioner's own job duties and experience”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“the additional sources that the Petitioner cites to on appeal are substantially like the evidence already in the record”
AAO decision text
Where this case turned
- 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
Notable
AAO disagreed with Director on the threshold advanced-degree finding (finding experience evidence insufficient) but did not disturb the ultimate outcome since it reached the same result via prong 1; it declined to reach prongs 2 and 3 citing Bagamasbad and Matter of L-A-C-.
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. 204.5(g)(1)
- 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(2)
- Matter of L-A-C-
- Poursina v. USCIS
- USCIS Policy Manual F.5(D)(2)
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