The Petitioner, an IT consultant, proposed to start a U.S. company offering IT consulting solutions—such as software development, AI/chatbot strategies, and business analytics—to help businesses cut costs and improve efficiency, while also training U.S. IT professionals.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“merely working in an important field is insufficient to establish the national importance of the proposed endeavor.”

“the alleged shortage of occupations or occupational skills does not render his proposed endeavor nationally important under the Dhanasar framework.”

“the Petitioner did not present supporting evidence, corroborating the assertions and figures with respect to the data he provided on his company.”

“the Petitioner has not shown that his proposed endeavor impacts the IT field more broadly to establish its national importance.”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

• business plan · discounted

  “the Petitioner did not establish the significance of this data to show that the benefits to a regional or the national economy would reach the level of 'substantial positive economic effects'”

  AAO decision text
• recommendation letter · discounted

  “the letters described his duties and praised his skills and experience, they do not evidence the broader impact of the Petitioner's work.”

  AAO decision text
• other · discounted

  “the issue is not whether the information technology industry ... are nationally important, but rather, the evidence must demonstrate the national importance of the Petitioner's specific endeavor”

  AAO decision text
• contract revenue · discounted

  “the Petitioner did not demonstrate that his proposed endeavor's claimed revenue and employment projections, even if credible or plausible, are such that the endeavor will have significant potential to employ U.S. workers”

  AAO decision text

Where this case turned

• 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
• 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

Notable

AAO devotes substantial discussion to USCIS Policy Manual entrepreneur-specific NIW guidance (revenue growth, awards/grants, IP, economically depressed areas) in rejecting the Petitioner's entrepreneur-based national importance arguments, ultimately finding the evidence uncorroborated. The advanced-degree-professional claim was treated as waived for lack of argument on appeal, and both exceptional-ability final merits determination and Dhanasar prong three were expressly reserved as unnecessary to the dispositive prong-one 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. 103.3
• Flores v. Garland
• Matter of L-A-C-
• Matter of O-R-E-
• Matter of R-A-M-

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