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, an attorney, proposed to create a consulting company providing legal consulting services to help U.S. companies do business with Brazilian companies and vice versa.
Field: legal consulting / international trade (Brazil-U.S. business) · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“we determined the Petitioner did not meet the first prong of the analytical framework in Matter of Dhanasar”
“the Petitioner did not establish how her proposed endeavor would have broader implications for the trade relationship between the United States and Brazil beyond the scope of the clients she would serve”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- motion resubmission · discounted
“The Petitioner submits copies of evidence previously submitted and does not state any new facts.”
AAO decision text
Where this case turned
- Endeavor too vague · p1 — described as a job role, not a defined undertaking
- Local, not national scope · p1 — impact confined to clients / a region
Notable
This is a motion to reopen following a prior AAO appeal dismissal, which itself followed a prior Nebraska Service Center denial. The AAO found the Petitioner failed to identify any error in the prior AAO decision (not quoting or referencing it, instead quoting the Director's original denial) and submitted no new facts, so the motion failed on procedural grounds under 8 C.F.R. 103.5(a)(4) without reaching a full re-analysis of the merits beyond incorporating the prior national-importance finding.
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. 103.5
- Matter of Coelho
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