The petitioner, a physician with experience as a CEO and pediatrician, proposed to establish a consulting firm offering maternal and child health consulting, mentoring, management, educational services, and digital products.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“she provides little meaningful detail beyond these generalized descriptions to specifically explain what these activities involve”

“the Petitioner has provided little evidence to support the business plan's claimed financial projections.”

“there is little evidence that her future work stands to impact or significantly reduce any claimed national shortage.”

“the Petitioner's work in an important industry or sector, even one that is the subject of national priorities, is not sufficient”

“his opinion is largely conclusory and does not specifically explain how the Petitioner's work, in particular, would produce such nationally important impacts.”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

• business plan · discounted

  “it provides only high-level summaries and broad objectives of her intended services without specific details”

  AAO decision text
• recommendation letter · discounted

  “his opinion is largely conclusory and does not specifically explain how the Petitioner's work would produce such nationally important impacts”

  AAO decision text
• other · discounted

  “they do not establish how her work, in particular, would impact those areas more broadly at a level rising to national importance”

  AAO decision text
• contract revenue · discounted

  “the Petitioner has provided little evidence to support the business plan's claimed financial projections”

  AAO decision text

Where this case turned

• 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
• Letters conclusory · p1 — letters praise skills in general terms without tracing specific impact
• Occupational shortage argument rejected · p1 — argues a labor shortage — the labor-certification question, not Dhanasar

Notable

AAO analogized the Petitioner's training/consulting activities to Dhanasar's own example of a classroom teacher whose work does not reach national importance. A footnote also notes an internal receipt-number correction unrelated to the merits. AAO expressly reserved prongs 2 and 3 and the substantial-merit portion of prong 1, resting dismissal solely on failure to show 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
• INA 203(b)(2)

Cases in adjacent profiles

• The Petitioner, a pharmacist, proposed to work in the United States through her own company providing pharmaceutical reg
• The Petitioner, a Brazilian-trained physiotherapist, proposed to work as a physical therapist and entrepreneur in the Un
• The Petitioner, a resident physician in New York holding a Chinese bachelor of medicine (MBBS) degree found equivalent t
• The Petitioner, a music therapist, proposed to establish and expand music therapy services and community music programs
• The Petitioner, a physical therapist, proposed to work as a physical therapist in the United States while operating his