dismissedSEP232022_01B52032022-09-23 · 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 public relations and fundraising management professional, proposed to continue work in the U.S. assisting companies with communication strategies, cross-border business development, and marketing, both through her current employer and prospective self-employment/clients.

Field: public relations and marketing · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

EB-2 threshold — addressed

The Director found the Petitioner qualifies as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree; this was not disputed on appeal.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“these letters do not sufficiently explain the national importance of her proposed work under the Dhanasar' s first prong.”

“the record does not show that the Petitioner' s proposed endeavor stands to sufficiently extend beyond her company, employers, and clientele to impact her field or the U.S. economy more broadly at a level commensurate with national importance.”

“Without sufficient information or evidence regarding any projected U.S. economic impact or job creation attributable to her future work, the record does not show that benefits to the U.S. regional or national economy resulting from the Petitioner's marketing projects would reach the level of "substantial positive economic effects"”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

recommendation letter · discounted
“these letters do not sufficiently explain the national importance of her proposed work under the Dhanasar' s first prong.”
AAO decision text
media · discounted
“the record does not show that benefits to the U.S. regional or national economy resulting from the Petitioner's marketing projects would reach the level of 'substantial positive economic effects'”
AAO decision text

Where this case turned

Economic claims unsupported · p1 — job/revenue projections with no corroborating basis
Employer-specific benefit · p1 — "work furthers my company's product" — value accrues to one firm
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

The Director had already found the Petitioner met the EB-2 advanced degree threshold, so the appeal turned solely on Dhanasar prong 1; the AAO expressly declined to reach prongs 2 and 3 as unnecessary.

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

← Back to the case explorer