dismissedSEP192024_15B52032024-09-19 · 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, a surveyor, proposed to operate his own company offering surveying services—including measurements, data collection, mapping, and training to industry professionals—in the United States.
Field: surveying · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“the relevant question nonetheless is not the importance of the field, industry, or profession in which the individual will work”
“the shortage of surveyors does not render the Petitioner's proposed endeavor nationally important under the Dhanasar framework”
“It is insufficient to claim an endeavor will have substantial economic effects or will create a broad impact without providing evidence to corroborate such claims.”
“the Petitioner 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
How the evidence was treated
- business plan · discounted
“the Petitioner 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 - recommendation letter · discounted
“While we do not discuss every piece of evidence individually, we have reviewed and considered each one.”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“that fact alone is insufficient to establish the national importance of the endeavor proposed here.”
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
- Occupational shortage argument rejected · p1 — argues a labor shortage — the labor-certification question, not Dhanasar
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
The Director had found the petitioner qualified as an individual of exceptional ability, but AAO expressly reserved that threshold classification issue as unnecessary given the dispositive prong 1 finding, citing Bagamasbad and Matter of L-A-C-.
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 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