dismissedOCT162020_05B52032020-10-16 · 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 public relations manager, planned to continue her career providing marketing, branding, event management, and public relations services to U.S. companies and clients, including potential positions with various large employers.
Field: public relations · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“we find the record does not show that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor stands to sufficiently extend beyond her potential employers and clientele to impact the public relations field or U.S. economy more broadly at a level commensurate with national importance.”
“Without sufficient information or evidence regarding any projected U.S. economic impact or job creation attributable to her future work, the record does not show that benefits to the U.S. regional or national economy resulting from the Petitioner's public relations projects would reach the level of "substantial positive economic effects"”
“the relevant question is not the importance of the industry or profession in which the individual will work; instead we focus on the "the specific endeavor that the foreign national proposes to undertake."”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- other · discounted
“she has not offered sufficient information and evidence to demonstrate that the prospective impact of her proposed endeavor rises to the level of national importance”
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
- 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
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
AAO explicitly notes petitioner does not need a specific job offer but considers her list of prospective employers to illustrate the nature of her intended work; decision emphasizes that industry-level importance (public relations generally) cannot substitute for showing the specific endeavor's national importance.
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, a mechanical engineer, proposed to advance thermal management solutions for high-power, compact, and rel
- The Petitioner, a senior engineering program manager specializing in electromechanical systems, proposed to advance moto
- The Petitioner proposed to provide innovative solutions to optimize freight and vessel operations in the U.S. shipping i
- The Petitioner, a sales manager, proposed an endeavor in the United States for which he sought an EB-2 national interest
- The Petitioner proposed to lead a nationwide initiative to develop and implement a standardized materials management mod