The Petitioner, a business developer, proposed to continue managing companies' business and financial operations, help U.S. companies expand into Latin American markets, and potentially open his own business-development consulting firm.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“these statements are not supported by financial projections.”

“The record lacks evidence that the proposed endeavor's future staffing levels and business activity would provide substantial economic benefits in Florida or in the United States, or that it otherwise has broader national implications within the field.”

“the relevant question is not the importance of the industry in which the individual will work; instead, we focus on the "the specific endeavor that the foreign national proposes to undertake."”

“Although the proposed endeavor may benefit the client companies that engage the Petitioner's services, the record does not sufficiently show that such benefits, either individually or cumulatively, would rise to the level of national importance.”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

• business plan · discounted

  “these statements are not supported by financial projections.”

  AAO decision text
• media · discounted

  “the relevant question is not the importance of the industry in which the individual will work; instead, we focus on the specific endeavor”

  AAO decision text
• resume experience · discounted

  “A determination regarding the claimed national importance of a specific proposed endeavor cannot be inferred based on the Petitioner's past accomplishments”

  AAO decision text
• recommendation letter · discounted

  “the Petitioner's expertise acquired through his academic and professional career primarily relates to the second prong of the Dhanasar framework”

  AAO decision text
• other · discounted

  “much of the content of the expert opinion letter lacked relevance and probative value with respect to the national importance”

  AAO decision text

Where this case turned

• Business plan speculative · p1 — projections without a documented basis or steps
• 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
• 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

Notable

AAO expressly declined to reach prongs 2 and 3, dismissing solely on prong 1 as an 'independent and alternate basis'; the record copy of the updated personal statement was noted to be missing pages/continuity.

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
• Matter of Caron Int'l
• Matter of D-R-
• Matter of L-A-C-
• Poursina v. USCIS

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