dismissedSEP132024_04B52032024-09-13 · 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, an operating manager in supply chain and logistics, planned to start a logistics consulting business in the U.S. providing services to import/export clients, claiming this would create jobs and economic growth.

Field: logistics and supply chain consulting · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

EB-2 threshold — addressed

Director found Petitioner qualified for EB-2 advanced degree professional classification based on bachelor's equivalent degree and five years of progressive work experience; not disputed on appeal.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“the record does not show how the Petitioner's endeavor will support a more innovative and resilient supply chain.”

“These are not essential goods and materials as described in the national initiative presented in the record.”

“he does not sufficiently support these projections with objective data as necessary to demonstrate that the benefits to the regional or national economy resulting from the undertaking would reach the level of "substantial positive economic effects"”

“he has not shown that his company's future staffing levels, five employees in the first year and 16 employees by year five, stands to provide substantial economic benefits so broadly as to be nationally important.”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

business plan · discounted
“he does not sufficiently support these projections with objective data”
AAO decision text
recommendation letter · discounted
“cannot substitute for the benchmarks of success as demonstrated by quantitative results”
AAO decision text
resume experience · credited
degree · credited
other · discounted

Where this case turned

Economic claims unsupported · p1 — job/revenue projections with no corroborating basis
Local, not national scope · p1 — impact confined to clients / a region
Occupational shortage argument rejected · p1 — argues a labor shortage — the labor-certification question, not Dhanasar

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

AAO addresses and rejects Petitioner's procedural due-process-style argument that the Director's decision and RFE failed to explain why evidence was insufficient, holding evidence is considered in totality and Director need not detail each item's deficiency. AAO also clarifies that 'overall impact on the economy' language was ambiguous but not prejudicial, and redirects the 'past successes' issue to prong two without deciding it, since prong one alone was dispositive.

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
Flores v. Garland
Matter of L-A-C-

What this case teaches

Analyst reading of the decision text.

Decisive factor

Petitioner failed to show his consulting endeavor—serving clients selling non-essential goods with modest projected staffing/revenue—had broad enough impact to be nationally important.

Transferable lesson

Support economic-impact projections with objective data and tie the endeavor concretely to a recognized national initiative, not just generic industry relevance.

Endeavor framing

moderate

National-importance theory

economic_job_creation · economic_growth_generic · government_interest

Evidence targeting

person_focused

Cases in adjacent profiles

← Back to the case explorer