The Petitioner, a Brazilian-trained lawyer, proposed to work as CEO and legal advisor of a legal consulting business he co-founded, providing legal support to U.S., Brazilian, and South American companies on Brazilian law issues.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“The Director found that the Petitioner did not establish that a waiver of the requirement of a job offer, and thus a labor certification, would be in the national interest.”

“the record does not sufficiently document the Petitioner's claimed potential prospective impact, including the asserted economic benefits to the United States.”

“merely working in the legal field or starting a legal consulting business is insufficient to establish the national importance of the proposed endeavor.”

“The industry reports and articles submitted do not discuss any projected U.S. economic impact or job creation specifically attributable to the Petitioner's proposed endeavor.”

“the record does not sufficiently detail the basis for its financial and staffing projections, or adequately explain how these projections will be realized.”

“The Petitioner does not demonstrate that his proposed endeavor extends beyond his business and his future clients to impact the field or any other industries or the U.S. economy more broadly”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

• business plan · discounted

  “the record does not sufficiently detail the basis for its financial and staffing projections, or adequately explain how these projections will be realized.”

  AAO decision text
• recommendation letter · discounted

  “the opinion does not focus on the Petitioner's specific endeavor and it having a potential prospective impact on the U.S. economy”

  AAO decision text
• resume experience · discounted

  “His academic credentials, professional experience, and achievements relate to the second prong of the Dhanasar framework”

  AAO decision text
• other · discounted

  “The industry reports and articles submitted do not discuss any projected U.S. economic impact or job creation specifically attributable to the Petitioner's proposed endeavor.”

  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
• 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
• Occupational shortage argument rejected · p1 — argues a labor shortage — the labor-certification question, not Dhanasar

Notable

AAO expressly declined to reach prongs 2 and 3, citing Bagamasbad and Matter of L-A-C- for the principle that agencies need not decide unnecessary issues once dispositive ground is found.

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 E-M-
• 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