The Petitioner, a lawyer and privacy professional, proposed to consult on privacy matters for public and private sector clients, including compliance with privacy laws, privacy litigation support, policy and legislation development, privacy research and publications, AI governance support, privacy-by-design implementation, and privacy impact assessments.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“Our assessment of national importance does not focus on the importance of issues to a field in general.”

“none of the articles mention the Petitioner, or otherwise address the potential prospective impact ofhis proposed endeavor.”

“Beyond working in his field, the Petitioner does not specify how his consultancy would extend beyond individual entities to impact privacy law and regulation more broadly on a level commensurate with national importance.”

“the record does not show that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor stands to sufficiently extend beyond his clientele to impact his field more broadly at a level commensurate with national importance.”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

• media · discounted

  “These articles discuss the importance of protecting personal data, but they do not address the Petitioner's proposed endeavor.”

  AAO decision text

Where this case turned

• 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

Petitioner argued that employer-specific and national benefits could coexist in a 'trickle down' structure inherent to EB-2/NIW eligibility; AAO rejected this as unsupported by the Act, finding no basis that employer benefit necessarily flows to national importance.

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-

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