dismissedSEP302024_07B52032024-09-30 · 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 sought to start a business in the finance industry specializing in real estate financing solutions for American and international clients.

Field: finance / real estate financing · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

EB-2 threshold — addressed

Director found EB-2 classification established; AAO reserved this issue without disturbing that finding, noting record lacked prior-employer letters but did not need to resolve it since NIW eligibility failed on other grounds.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“the relevant question is not the importance of the industry or profession in which the individual will work”

“a shortage of qualified professionals does not render the work of an individual nationally important under the Dhanasar decision”

“Without sufficient documentary evidence of the specific proposed endeavor's broader impact in the industry, the Petitioner's proposed endeavor does not meet the "national importance" element”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

business plan · discounted
“her past experience does not establish national importance under the Dhanasar framework”
AAO decision text
resume experience · discounted
“past experience... does not establish the national importance of the proposed endeavor as it does not speak to the prospective impact”
AAO decision text
recommendation letter · discounted
“it restates many of the same claims already addressed above, speaking broadly of the finance industry”
AAO decision text
other · discounted
“shortages of qualified workers are directly addressed by the U.S. Department of Labor through the labor certification process”
AAO decision text

Where this case turned

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
Occupational shortage argument rejected · p1 — argues a labor shortage — the labor-certification question, not Dhanasar

2,179coded 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 reserved the underlying EB-2 classification issue despite the Director having already granted it, citing Bagamasbad/L-A-C- to avoid unnecessary advisory findings; dismissal rested solely on prong 1 national importance.

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. 204.5(g)(1)
8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(2)
Flores v. Garland
Matter of L-A-C-

Cases in adjacent profiles

← Back to the case explorer