The Petitioner, an accountant, proposed to implement and disseminate blockchain-based parameterization systems for accounting services, targeting tax planning and financial/administrative management for startups.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“Rather, the Petitioner must demonstrate the national importance of her specific, proposed endeavor of providing her particular services in "target[ing] startups."”

“the record does not show through supporting documentation how her particular endeavor sufficiently extends beyond her prospective clients or limited businesses that may use her services”

“Again, the issue is not whether her initiative will impact the limited startups in which she desires to pursue but the broader impact in the field.”

“The Petitioner, for instance, did not demonstrate any employment figures that would utilize a significant population of workers in the area or would substantially impact job creation and economic growth”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

• business plan · discounted

  “provided plans that contain general and broad claims, which do not support her assertions”

  AAO decision text
• other · discounted

  “the matter here is not the importance of blockchain technology”

  AAO decision text

Where this case turned

• Economic claims unsupported · p1 — job/revenue projections with no corroborating basis
• Endeavor too vague · p1 — described as a job role, not a defined undertaking
• 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

Notable

Footnote 6 addresses the underlying classification issue even though AAO said it need not reach it: FOD had found Petitioner qualified as advanced-degree professional (not exceptional ability) based on bachelor's plus five years progressive experience, but AAO's footnote suggests the record did not show the accountant position/industry normally requires an advanced degree, raising an unresolved threshold question the AAO explicitly declined to decide on the merits.

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
• Flores v. Garland

Cases in adjacent profiles

• The Petitioner proposed to work as an IT consultant in the United States, providing cybersecurity and digital transforma
• The petitioner proposed to establish his own company providing specialized business consultancy, auditing, and training
• The petitioner proposed to work as a consultant engineer through his own company, specializing in development projects t
• The Petitioner proposed to start a project management consultancy in the United States that would help small and mid-siz
• The Petitioner proposed to establish a legal consultancy in the United States focused on alternative dispute resolution