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 civil engineer, proposed to work through Florida-based limited liability companies he registered to build and sell residential houses, bringing in foreign investors from Brazil to fund construction projects.
Field: civil engineering / residential construction and real estate · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — addressed
The Director found the Petitioner qualifies as an advanced degree professional; this was not contested on appeal.
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“the record does not show that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor stands to sufficiently extend beyond his companies, investors, and clients to impact the field of civil engineering, or the construction and real estate industries more broadly”
“the Petitioner has not sufficiently explained or documented the creation of 60 jobs through his endeavor”
“the relevant question is not the importance of the field, industry, or profession in which the individual will work”
“the Petitioner has not offered sufficient evidence that the area where his companies operate is economically depressed, that he would employ a significant population of workers in that area”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- recommendation letter · discounted
“these letters do not sufficiently explain the national importance of his proposed work under the Dhanasar's first prong”
AAO decision text - business plan · discounted
“he has not offered sufficient information and evidence to demonstrate that the prospective impact of his proposed endeavor rises to the level of national importance”
AAO decision text - contract revenue · discounted
“other than a few invoices and contracts, the Petitioner has not sufficiently explained or documented the creation of 60 jobs through his endeavor”
AAO decision text - other · credited
Where this case turned
- 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
Notable
The AAO relied heavily on a job-creation letter from a general manager of a partner organization, finding it 'incongruous' that purchasing six building lots would require two ongoing land surveyor positions, and concluded reliance on that letter was 'misplaced.'
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.
- Poursina v. USCIS
What this case teaches
Analyst reading of the decision text.
Petitioner failed to show his specific construction/investment endeavor's impact extended beyond his own companies and clients to a level of national importance, especially unsubstantiated job-creation claims.
Support job-creation and economic-impact claims with verifiable, itemized documentation (not just partner letters) tying them concretely to the specific endeavor's scale and reach beyond the petitioner's immediate business.
moderate
economic_job_creation · economic_growth_generic · field_advancement
mixed
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