dismissedOCT242023_03B52032023-10-24 · 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 Beneficiary, co-owner of a petitioning U.S. cybersecurity company, sought to work as a cybersecurity expert providing electronic data protection services to reduce cybersecurity threats to client organizations.
Field: cybersecurity · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — addressed
AAO affirmed Beneficiary qualifies as an advanced degree professional based on bachelor's degree plus 16 years of progressive experience.
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“it appears that the prospective impact would be localized to prospective employers and customers in the local community”
“the company has not demonstrated that these business levels reflect a significant national economic impact or would benefit an economically depressed area”
“the Petitioner has not established that the Beneficiary's work would introduce innovations to the cybersecurity field”
“STEM endeavors have substantial merit. But, to establish national importance, they must also have a broad impact.”
“the company has not demonstrated that - collectively - these protection services would rise to the level of national importance”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- contract revenue · discounted
“the company has not demonstrated that these business levels reflect a significant national economic impact”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“the company has not demonstrated that - collectively - these protection services would rise to the level of national importance”
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
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 →
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. 204.5(k)(2)
- Matter of L-A-C-
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