dismissedOCT312024_04B52032024-10-31 · 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, an entrepreneur and IT manager, proposed to provide business consulting and tracking technology services, including addressing a claimed driver shortage.
Field: information technology / tracking technologies · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“their proposed endeavor stands to sufficiently extend beyond their company and its clientele”
“The Petitioner has not established that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor stands to impact or significantly reduce these claimed national shortages.”
“shortages of qualified workers are directly addressed by the U.S. Department of Labor through the labor certification process”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- motion resubmission · discounted
“The Petitioner reargues the same or similar assertions but does not identify any specific error of law or fact.”
AAO decision text
Where this case turned
- Employer-specific benefit · p1 — "work furthers my company's product" — value accrues to one firm
- Occupational shortage argument rejected · p1 — argues a labor shortage — the labor-certification question, not Dhanasar
746coded 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 dismissed appeal; the AAO found the Petitioner merely reargued prior points without identifying legal or factual error, so it declined to substantively re-analyze prongs beyond referencing the prior decision's national importance findings.
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)
- 8 C.F.R. 103.5(a)(4)
- Matter of O-S-G-
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