The Petitioner sought to operate an at-home beauty services and products application business in Florida, connecting customers with beauty service providers (mostly women) in their homes, modeled on a similar app she operated in Colombia.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“the government initiatives acknowledge the need to provide greater employment and economic opportunities for women in the United States, they do not indicate that government has an interest in the Petitioner's planned business activities”

“the record does not show that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor stands to sufficiently extend beyond her immediate clientele for beauty services and prospective employees”

“she has not shown that her company's future staffing levels, business activity, and associated tax revenue stand to provide substantial economic benefits in Florida or the United States”

“she has not offered sufficient evidence that the area where _________.operates is economically depressed, that she would employ a significant population of workers in that area”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

• business plan · discounted

  “it does not demonstrate that benefits to the regional or national economy resulting from the Petitioner's undertaking would reach the level of "substantial positive economic effects"”

  AAO decision text
• recommendation letter · ignored
• other · discounted

  “they do not indicate that government has an interest in the Petitioner's planned business activities to establish an at home beauty services and products app”

  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
• 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 Petitioner relied heavily on general articles about the gender wage gap and women's economic empowerment (including White House materials) to argue national importance, but the AAO found these supported the importance of the field/issue generally, not the specific proposed endeavor, reiterating the key Dhanasar distinction between field importance and endeavor-specific 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
• INA 203(b)(2)
• Matter of L-A-C-

Cases in adjacent profiles

• The Beneficiary proposed to establish an asset investment management and compliance advisory firm in New York offering c
• The Petitioner proposed to develop and commercialize zeolite-based products in the United States, including agricultural
• The Petitioner proposed to operate a medical billing and healthcare revenue cycle management firm in the United States,
• The Petitioner proposed to establish and lead as CEO a cybersecurity and crisis management company in Florida, offering
• The Petitioner proposed to establish and operate an IT consultancy company in Michigan providing cloud migration, cybers