dismissedSEP092024_02B52032024-09-09 · 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 proposed to work as a finance manager/finance technologist, helping her employer and other U.S. companies adopt strategies to expand operations, reduce costs, and create jobs.
Field: finance/financial management · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — addressed
Director concluded, and AAO did not disturb, that Petitioner qualified as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree.
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“Moreover, the Petitioner must demonstrate the national importance of her specific proposed endeavor rather than the importance of the industry or profession in which the individual will work.”
“The Petitioner's claimed extensive experiences are material to Dhanasar 's second prong-whether an individual is well positioned to advance a proposed endeavor-but they are generally immaterial to the first Dhanasar prong”
“the Petitioner did not demonstrate that her proposed endeavor has broader implications, has significant potential to employ U.S. workers, or that it would broadly enhance societal welfare or cultural or artistic enrichment.”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- recommendation letter · discounted
“they are generally immaterial to the first Dhanasar prong-whether a specific, prospective, proposed endeavor has both substantial merit and national importance”
AAO decision text - resume experience · discounted
“they are misplaced in the context of the first Dhanasar prong”
AAO decision text
Where this case turned
- Employer-specific benefit · p1 — "work furthers my company's product" — value accrues to one firm
- Endeavor too vague · p1 — described as a job role, not a defined undertaking
- Field importance conflated with endeavor · p1 — argues the field matters, not the specific endeavor
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
AAO expressly adopted and affirmed the Director's second denial decision under Matter of Burbano rather than conducting fully independent analysis, and declined to reach prongs 2 and 3 as unnecessary given the 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. 103.3
- 8 C.F.R. 103.5
- Chen v. INS
- Matter of L-A-C-
- Poursina v. USCIS
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