dismissedSEP132023_11B52032023-09-13 · 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 provide business consulting services to small and medium-sized U.S. companies, particularly Latino-owned businesses, through advice on financial control, organizational structure, and profitability.
Field: business consulting/administration · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“she has not shown that her proposed endeavor stands to sufficiently extend beyond her company and its clientele to impact her field or the U.S. economy more broadly at a level commensurate with national importance.”
“she has not demonstrated that her undertaking has significant potential to employ U.S. workers or otherwise offers substantial positive economic effects for our nation.”
“the record does not show that benefits to the regional or national economy resulting from the Petitioner's business consulting projects would reach the level of "substantial positive economic effects"”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- other · discounted
“The record includes a report from the White House discussing the increase in small businesses under the Biden-Harris Administration.”
AAO decision text - business plan · discounted
“she has not offered sufficient information and evidence to demonstrate that the prospective impact of her proposed endeavor rises to the level of national importance”
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
2,501coded 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
Petitioner did not submit a brief or additional evidence on appeal, relying only on the initial record; AAO framed dismissal as based on independent and alternate grounds despite reaching only 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.
- Matter of L-A-C-
- Poursina v. USCIS
Cases in adjacent profiles
- The Petitioner proposed to work as an IT consultant in the United States, providing cybersecurity and digital transforma
- The petitioner proposed to establish his own company providing specialized business consultancy, auditing, and training
- The petitioner proposed to work as a consultant engineer through his own company, specializing in development projects t
- The Petitioner proposed to start a project management consultancy in the United States that would help small and mid-siz
- The Petitioner proposed to establish a legal consultancy in the United States focused on alternative dispute resolution