dismissedAUG182026_01B52032026-08-18 · appeal
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.
Through his own company, manufacture and refurbish modular homes for Native American communities in the United States to address housing shortages and overcrowding.
Field: modular housing construction / community economic development · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — addressed
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“the Petitioner improperly relies upon the importance of the industry as sufficient to establish the national importance of his proposed endeavor”
“he does not provide sufficient detail on what specific jobs his proposed endeavor will create, where they will be created, and how many jobs”
“The articles demonstrate a problem but do not establish the proposed endeavor's impact on the problem.”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- other · discounted
“The articles demonstrate a problem but do not establish the proposed endeavor's impact on the problem.”
AAO decision text - business plan · discounted
“the Petitioner does not provide sufficient detail or corroborating evidence to support these statements”
AAO decision text - recommendation letter · discounted
“evidence of the Petitioner's past success and experience is relevant to Dhanasar's prong two analysis”
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
1,358coded 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 agreed the USCIS denial contained errors: it analyzed an unrelated field (PFAS predictive models, geoenvironmental research) and said no support letter explained the endeavor when a project plan was in the record. Dismissed anyway on de novo prong-1 review. Prior housing work was for a First Nation in Canada.
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(k)(2)
- Flores v. Garland
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