dismissedSEP262024_07B52032024-09-26 · 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 proposed to manufacture and sell eco-friendly furniture made from reused materials in the United States, using a 'white label' model to help small and medium businesses offer sustainable products and offering consulting services to other furniture manufacturers.
Field: eco-friendly furniture manufacturing · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“the relevant question is not the importance of the industry or profession in which the individual will work”
“there is no explanation of the origins of the estimates or of how they were calculated”
“Broad statements and projections regarding the potential growth of the Petitioner's business ... do not demonstrate the prospective impact directly attributable to his proposed endeavor”
“he has not provided evidence to establish that he would employ a significant population of workers in the area”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- business plan · discounted
“there is no explanation of the origins of the estimates or of how they were calculated”
AAO decision text
Where this case turned
- Business plan speculative · p1 — projections without a documented basis or steps
- Economic claims unsupported · p1 — job/revenue projections with no corroborating basis
- 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
1,312coded 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
Director had already found threshold EB-2 classification met, and had found prong 1 substantial merit and prong 2 well-positioned satisfied; AAO on de novo review reversed course and found prong 1 national importance not met, disagreeing with the Director's prior favorable findings on that prong.
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
- INA 203(b)(2)
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