The Petitioner, a business intelligence analyst, proposed to provide data analysis and business intelligence services to small and medium-sized companies, first as an employee/senior advisor and later as an independent consultant, to help improve their revenue and profitability.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“The record does not adequately describe how the Petitioner's services would have broader implications to their field of business intelligence data analysis.”

“The Petitioner here has not demonstrated how conferring the benefit to the "mid-size to large enterprises" they intend to solicit have any implication or benefit rising to a level beyond them and touching matters of national importance.”

“it is not clear from the record how the improvement of one entity's revenue would have a substantial prospective positive economic effect commensurate with national importance”

“these relate more to the substantiality of the proposed endeavor's merit than its national importance”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

• recommendation letter · discounted

  “The Petitioner's employment letters, recommendation letters, and letters expressing appreciation did not reflect how the proposed endeavor implicates national importance”

  AAO decision text
• business plan · discounted

  “The Petitioner's professional plan couches their endeavor in terms of targeting their services to "SME" companies”

  AAO decision text
• resume experience · discounted

  “the letters focused on the Petitioner's past work”

  AAO decision text
• media · discounted

  “these relate more to the substantiality of the proposed endeavor's merit than its national importance”

  AAO decision text
• certification membership · ignored

Where this case turned

• Economic claims unsupported · p1 — job/revenue projections with no corroborating basis
• Employer-specific benefit · p1 — "work furthers my company's product" — value accrues to one firm
• 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

The AAO explicitly addressed and excused a material-change concern under Matter of Izummi, finding the Petitioner's RFE revisions 'concerning' but not disqualifying because they retained the character of the originally described endeavor. The decision also emphasizes that the initial filing was 'essentially a job search,' which is not the purpose of a national interest waiver.

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
• INA 203(b)(2)
• Matter of Izummi
• Matter of Katigbak
• Matter of L-A-C-
• Matter of Y-B-
• Poursina v. USCIS

Cases in adjacent profiles

• The Petitioner, a mechanical engineer, proposed to advance thermal management solutions for high-power, compact, and rel
• The Petitioner, a senior engineering program manager specializing in electromechanical systems, proposed to advance moto
• The Petitioner proposed to provide innovative solutions to optimize freight and vessel operations in the U.S. shipping i
• The Petitioner, a sales manager, proposed an endeavor in the United States for which he sought an EB-2 national interest
• The Petitioner proposed to lead a nationwide initiative to develop and implement a standardized materials management mod