dismissedOCT152024_05B52032024-10-15 · motion_reconsider · 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 proposed to provide business development consulting services to companies in the textile, food, and automotive industries, though it was unclear whether he would be employed by such companies or operate his own consulting firm.
Field: business development (textile, food, and automotive industries) · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“the record does not contain information or evidence regarding any projected direct economic impacts or job creation attributable to the Petitioner's future work”
“A shortage of qualified professionals alone does not render the work of an individual business development specialist or consultant nationally important under the Dhanasar precedent decision.”
“the record does not clarify whether the Petitioner intends to be employed by such companies or he intends to operate a consulting services company”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- business plan · discounted
“neither the professional plan the Petitioner submitted nor the remainder of the record explain[] the expected scope of his intended consulting activities”
AAO decision text - motion resubmission · discounted
“The Petitioner reasserts that we should conclude that he is eligible for a national interest waiver”
AAO decision text
Where this case turned
- Economic claims unsupported · p1 — job/revenue projections with no corroborating basis
- Endeavor too vague · p1 — described as a job role, not a defined undertaking
- Occupational shortage argument rejected · p1 — argues a labor shortage — the labor-certification question, not Dhanasar
2,501coded 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
This is a motion to reconsider following a prior AAO appellate dismissal; the AAO incorporates its prior appeal analysis by reference and finds the Petitioner failed to identify any specific misapplication of law or policy, merely requesting a contrary conclusion.
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. 103.5(a)(1)(ii)
- 8 C.F.R. 103.5(a)(3)
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