The petitioner, a logistics manager, planned to operate her own startup logistics consulting company in Florida that would provide clients a proprietary software dashboard to centralize and manage international import/export logistics.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“the plan does not clarify whether "reaching out" will entail operating new staffed worksites in those locations, remotely providing services to clients in those locations, or some other type of operational posture”

“the business plan also provides arbitrary, unsubstantiated financial information”

“neither the plan nor the remainder of the record clarify why the company would generate such specific revenue amounts in any given year”

“the proposed endeavor appears to benefit the Petitioner's company and its clients”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

• business plan · discounted

  “the business plan provides arbitrary, unsubstantiated financial information”

  AAO decision text
• other · discounted

  “do not discuss the Petitioner, the specific endeavor she proposes to undertake, and how the specific endeavor may have the type of broader implications”

  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

Notable

AAO expressly reserved judgment on substantial merit and on prongs 2 and 3, resting the entire dismissal on national importance alone; it also invoked Matter of Ho's 'doubt cast on any aspect of proof' principle to extend the business plan's unreliability to the rest of the record.

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.

• Flores v. Garland
• Matter of Ho
• 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