dismissedSEP102024_05B52032024-09-10 · 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 an IT Specialist in the California area, providing specialized IT services to U.S.-based technology companies to address customer needs.
Field: information technology · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“the matter here is not whether these initiatives are nationally important”
“the Petitioner must demonstrate the national importance of his specific, proposed endeavor of providing his services as an IT Specialist in the California area”
“the Petitioner did not demonstrate how his employment would largely influence the field and rise to the level of national importance”
“the Petitioner did not sufficiently explain or demonstrate how his particular proposed endeavor would have any projected U.S. economic impact or job creation”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- business plan · discounted
“the record does not show through supporting documentation how the Petitioner's endeavor sufficiently extends beyond his prospective clients”
AAO decision text - resume experience · discounted
“the Petitioner's knowledge, skills, and abilities relate to the second prong of the Dhanasar framework”
AAO decision text
Where this case turned
- Economic claims unsupported · p1 — job/revenue projections with no corroborating basis
- 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
- Local, not national scope · p1 — impact confined to clients / a region
2,589coded 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 explicitly rejected the Director's finding that the endeavor lacked substantial merit but still dismissed on national importance grounds, framing the dismissal as resting on independent and alternate bases and declining to reach threshold classification or prongs two and three.
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
- Matter of L-A-C-
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