This appeal was not successful at this stage
The appeal was dismissed because the Petitioner failed to demonstrate that his proposed multimedia production business would have national importance, a required prong under the Dhanasar framework. The AAO found his business projections and expert opinion insufficient to show impact beyond his own company, employees, and clients.
A Brazilian-born entrepreneur with 12 years of experience in commercial photography, video, and multimedia production sought EB-2 classification with a national interest waiver to start a U.S. multimedia production and marketing company. Although the Director and AAO both found the proposed endeavor had substantial merit, neither found it demonstrated national importance under the Dhanasar framework. The Petitioner's business projections ($2.1 million in revenue, 48 employees in five years), claims of HUBZone economic impact, and expert opinion from a journalism professor all failed to show how his specific business would impact the broader economy or his field at a national level. The AAO reserved judgment on the EB-2 qualifications and remaining Dhanasar prongs, dismissing the appeal solely on the national importance prong.
What worked: The Petitioner successfully established substantial merit — the AAO agreed the proposed business could generate jobs, tax revenue, and contribute to cultural diversity. The formation of an LLC and preparation of a detailed business plan were positively noted.
What failed: 1. Business projections were too small-scale ($2.1M revenue, 48 jobs) to demonstrate national economic impact. 2. The HUBZone argument failed because Petitioner could not show his specific location within the city qualified or how it would benefit a HUBZone. 3. The expert opinion was too general and did not tie the specific venture to broader national-level impact on the field or economy.
Takeaway: NIW petitioners in commercial or entrepreneurial fields must go beyond showing their business is viable — they must demonstrate, with specifics, how their particular venture will affect the national economy or their field more broadly. Generic expert opinions and forward-looking revenue projections are insufficient without concrete evidence of national-level impact.
Cases like this are frequently used by attorneys when responding to RFEs or building initial petitions. The evidence patterns that worked (or failed) here directly reflect what USCIS officers look for when evaluating EB-2-NIW criteria.
● Evidence that moved the needle
- The Petitioner successfully established substantial merit — the AAO agreed the proposed business could generate jobs, tax revenue, and contribute to cultural diversity
- The formation of an LLC and preparation of a detailed business plan were positively noted.
● Evidence that wasn't enough alone
- Business projections were too small-scale ($2.1M revenue, 48 jobs) to demonstrate national economic impact
- The HUBZone argument failed because Petitioner could not show his specific location within the city qualified or how it would benefit a HUBZone
- The expert opinion was too general and did not tie the specific venture to broader national-level impact on the field or economy.
Business plan projecting $2.1 million in revenues and 48 employees by year five
Formation of a limited liability company in 2023 for multimedia production and marketing
Evidence that the venture could generate U.S. jobs, tax revenues, and increase cultural and artistic diversity — sufficient to show substantial merit
Five-year revenue projections of $2.1 million and 48 employees found insufficient to demonstrate national-level economic impact
Claim that headquarters would be in a HUBZone city rejected because Petitioner failed to show the specific location within the city was a HUBZone or how the business would benefit a HUBZone
General arguments about the importance of business development professionals and immigrant entrepreneurs to the U.S. economy not specific enough to the proposed venture
Expert opinion from a journalism professor found unpersuasive because it did not demonstrate how the specific venture would affect the economy or field on a national level
Completed
I-140 filed
Entrepreneur in commercial photography, video production, podcast, and multimedia marketing services
Completed
Director, Texas Service Center — Denied
Initial decision: Denied.
Completed
Appeal to the AAO
Petitioner appealed to the Administrative Appeals Office for de novo review.
2024-05-16
AAO decision — Dismissed
The appeal was dismissed because the Petitioner failed to demonstrate that his proposed multimedia production business would have national importance, a required prong under the Dhanasar framework. The AAO found his business projections and expert opinion insufficient to show impact beyond his own company, employees, and clients.
If you're appealing a similar decision, I-290B must be filed within 30 days of personal service of the denial, or 33 days if mailed.
Find this useful? A coffee helps keep Case Reviewer free and ad-free.
Buy me a coffee