dismissedOCT192023_05B52032023-10-19 · 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 proposed to open and lead a human resources management consulting firm in Florida, serving small and mid-sized U.S. businesses and American companies operating in Brazil, with planned expansion to other states.
Field: human resource management · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“the Petitioner must demonstrate the national importance of his specific, proposed endeavor of providing consultancy services through the operation o±1 lrather than the importance of human resources and related fields and industries.”
“the record does not show through supporting documentation how I Istands to sufficiently extend beyond its prospective clients, to impact the industry or the U.S. economy more broadly at a level commensurate with national importance.”
“the Petitioner did not demonstrate how his business plan's claimed revenue and employment projections, even if credible or plausible, have significant potential to employ U.S. workers or otherwise offers substantial positive economic effects for our nation.”
“the Petitioner did not demonstrate that such future staffing levels would provide substantial economic benefits to Florida or other future areas, or the region or U.S. economy more broadly”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- business plan · discounted
“the business plan does not establish that the benefits to the regional or national economy 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
- 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
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
The Director had found substantial merit established but not national importance; AAO affirms only the national importance failure and declines to reach prongs 2 and 3, citing Bagamasbad and Matter of L-A-C- for not addressing unnecessary issues.
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 L-A-C-
- Poursina v. USCIS
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