dismissedSEP022021_02B52032021-09-02 · appeal · Nebraska 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 general and operational manager with restaurant experience in Brazil, proposed to open and operate a Brazilian barbecue restaurant unit in the Florida area, with plans to expand to additional locations.
Field: restaurant business administration · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“the Petitioner must demonstrate the national importance of his opening a restaurant in the... Florida area rather than the national importance of restaurant entrepreneurism or entrepreneurism overall”
“the record does not show how opening and operating a restaurant... stands to sufficiently extend beyond his own company and clientele”
“none of his business plans discuss job creation or indicate the number of workers required at the restaurant”
“the Petitioner did not offer any relevant supporting evidence to corroborate his claims in the business plans”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- business plan · discounted
“the Petitioner did not offer any relevant supporting evidence to corroborate his claims in the business plans”
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
- 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
1,358coded 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 Petitioner conceded substantial merit was found by the Director, but the AAO focused solely on national importance failure under prong 1 as dispositive, expressly declining to reach prongs 2 and 3.
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.
- INA 203(b)(2)
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