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 establish a company providing security services to businesses and individuals throughout the United States, and to train individuals seeking careers as security officers, with an emphasis on school safety.
Field: security services / school safety · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — not met
AAO found the Petitioner did not establish her foreign Titulo de Licenciado is equivalent to a U.S. bachelor's degree (no transcript/credential evaluation) and that her lato sensu postgraduate certificate is not equivalent to a U.S. master's degree; exceptional-ability track reserved. This finding was not the basis of dismissal because the Petitioner lacked notice of the issue.
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“she submits little explanation or evidentiary support as to how her proposed endeavor would impact school safety on a national level.”
“these employment and revenue projections are not supported by details showing their basis, nor do they demonstrate a significant potential to either employ U.S. workers or to substantially impact the regional or national economy.”
“they do not offer persuasive detail concerning the impact of her proposed endeavor or establish how such an impact would extend beyond her company and its clients.”
“merely working in an important field or profession is insufficient to establish the national importance of the proposed endeavor.”
AAO decision text
Prong 2 — well positionednot established · dispositive
“her Titulo de Licenciado in physical education is not related to her proposed endeavor of establishing a company”
“the Petitioner has not demonstrated that her participation in two projects represents a record of success in her field or that it is otherwise an indication that she is well positioned to advance her proposed endeavor.”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- degree · discounted
“Without the transcript or credential evaluation, the Petitioner has not established that her foreign degree is a 4-year Titulo de Licenciado”
AAO decision text - business plan · discounted
“the business plan does not mention anything about security and safety in schools.”
AAO decision text - recommendation letter · discounted
“they do not offer persuasive detail concerning the impact of her proposed endeavor”
AAO decision text - resume experience · discounted
“the Petitioner has not demonstrated that her participation in two projects represents a record of success”
AAO decision text - media · discounted
“merely working in an important field or profession is insufficient to establish the national importance of the proposed endeavor”
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
- Letters conclusory · p1 — letters praise skills in general terms without tracing specific impact
- degree endeavor mismatch · p2 — the advanced degree is in a different field from the endeavor
- Record of success insufficient · p2 — a claimed track record the documents do not establish
Notable
AAO withdrew SCOPS' favorable finding that the Petitioner qualified as an advanced-degree professional (citing missing transcript/credential evaluation), but expressly declined to base the dismissal on this because the Petitioner had not been put on notice; it reserved the exceptional-ability track and the third Dhanasar prong. The AAO also rejected the Petitioner's due-process/APA argument about SCOPS' failure to address prong two and her claim that SCOPS applied a heightened standard of proof.
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
- Flores v. Garland
- Matter of L-A-C-
What this case teaches
Analyst reading of the decision text.
Petitioner failed to show the specific security-company endeavor's impact extended beyond her firm/clients to a national scale; letters and business plan did not substantiate national-level effect.
Support projected job/revenue figures with documented methodology and show concrete evidence linking the endeavor's outputs to effects beyond the company's direct clients on a national scale.
moderate
public_health · economic_job_creation · field_advancement
person_focused
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