The Petitioner proposed to provide strategic consulting services to American small and medium-sized businesses, aiming to improve their commercial and sales strategies, market valuation, revenues, and profitability.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“The Petitioner did not provide further detail on the specific prospective occupation or proposed endeavor that he would focus on to illustrate the nature of the work”

“they do not serve as evidence to show how the Petitioner would provide consultancy services to small- and medium-sized businesses at a scale that would have a national impact”

“he has not demonstrated that the endeavor he proposes to undertake has significant potential to employ U.S. workers or otherwise offers substantial positive economic effects for the nation”

“the record does not include a plan or other indication of how the Petitioner will operate a strategic consultancy company that will impact businesses or the economy at the level of national importance”

“Absent probative evidence to show the realistic potential of the Petitioner's company to operate at all, it is not evident that the company will generate revenue”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

• business plan · discounted

  “the record does not include a plan or other indication of how the Petitioner will operate a strategic consultancy company”

  AAO decision text
• recommendation letter · discounted

  “letters of recommendations lauding the Petitioner's talents and professionalism ... indicates that the Petitioner has extensive experience”

  AAO decision text
• other · discounted

  “they do not serve as evidence to show how the Petitioner would provide consultancy services ... at a scale that would have a national impact”

  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

Notable

AAO cites Flores v. Garland (5th Cir. 2023) as recent circuit authority confirming NIW decisions are discretionary, joining Ninth, Eleventh, and D.C. Circuits.

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 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