dismissedSEP052024_03B52032024-09-05 · 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 sought to work as CEO of his own company providing international renewable-energy feasibility studies and net-zero energy strategies to clients, which he claimed would create jobs and reduce U.S. reliance on foreign oil and gas.
Field: renewable energy feasibility studies / net-zero energy strategy consulting · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“merely working in an important field is insufficient to establish the national importance of the proposed endeavor”
“the record does not sufficiently detail the basis for the Petitioner's financial and staffing projections”
“the industry reports and articles submitted do not discuss any projected U.S. economic impact or job creation specifically attributable to the Petitioner's proposed endeavor”
“he has not established with specific, probative evidence that his endeavor will have significant potential to employ U.S. workers”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- business plan · discounted
“the record does not sufficiently detail the basis for the Petitioner's financial and staffing projections”
AAO decision text - recommendation letter · discounted
“They also do not include independent, corroborating evidence to support his claims”
AAO decision text - resume experience · discounted
“largely demonstrate the Petitioner's individual professional background rather than the potential impact of his specific endeavor”
AAO decision text - media · discounted
“merely working in an important field is insufficient to establish the national importance of the proposed endeavor”
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
- Occupational shortage argument rejected · p1 — argues a labor shortage — the labor-certification question, not Dhanasar
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 argued USCIS applied a stricter-than-preponderance standard; the AAO rejected this as unsupported and noted the Director had properly applied the preponderance standard. All other Dhanasar prongs reserved as unnecessary given dispositive prong 1 failure.
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)
- Flores v. Garland
- Matter of L-A-C-
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