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 initially proposed working as a lodging manager performing front-desk coordination and administrative tasks while exploring business opportunities in the service/tourism sphere; in his RFE response he changed his endeavor to launching a hotel management company focused on environmentally sustainable hospitality services.
Field: hospitality/lodging management · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — not met
The Director found the Petitioner qualified as an advanced degree professional, but AAO withdrew this finding on de novo review because the Petitioner's own evidence (Occupational Outlook Handbook) showed lodging manager positions typically require only a high school diploma, not a U.S. baccalaureate degree, so he is not a 'member of the professions' under 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(2).
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“Accordingly, we conclude that the Petitioner made an impermissible material change to his proposed endeavor.”
“We have insufficient information concerning the Petitioner's initial proposed endeavor with which to determine whether it has substantial merit or national importance.”
“The Petitioner has not adequately explained, and the sparse evidence in the record does not show, why working as a lodging manager and performing exploratory market research to determine the best business opportunity has substantial merit or national importance.”
“Because we have so little information regarding the initial proposed endeavor, we are unable to even conduct a full analysis under the Dhanasar framework”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- business plan · discounted
“This new endeavor was presented after the filing date and cannot retroactively establish eligibility.”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“Since the Petitioner's own evidence makes clear that these positions do not require a U.S. baccalaureate degree”
AAO decision text
Where this case turned
- Endeavor too vague · p1 — described as a job role, not a defined undertaking
- Material change of endeavor · p1 — the endeavor described on appeal is not the one filed
Notable
AAO withdrew the Director's favorable threshold finding sua sponte (advanced degree professional status), then applied the material change doctrine (Matter of Izummi) to reject the Petitioner's RFE-stage pivot from an exploratory lodging manager role to a sustainable hotel management company, adjudicating eligibility only on the original vague/exploratory endeavor which it found too undeveloped to assess under Dhanasar prong 1.
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. 103.2(b)(12)
- 8 C.F.R. 103.3
- 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(2)
- Flores v. Garland
- Matter of Izummi
- Matter of Katigbak
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