A Brazilian tax attorney sought to establish her own U.S.-based company in Florida to provide tax consulting and legal services to U.S. businesses and individuals with assets, income, or expansion interests in Brazil.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“we conclude the Petitioner has not shown that her proposed endeavor stands to sufficiently extend beyond her own company or clientele to impact her field or the U.S. economy more broadly”

“we are not persuaded by the Petitioner's claim that her proposed endeavor has national importance due to the shortage of tax preparers”

“Without sufficient information or evidence regarding any projected U.S. economic impact or job creation attributable to her future work”

“Much of the content of the letter is lacking relevance because it discusses the importance of the Petitioner's industry and occupation rather than addressing how the specific proposed endeavor would satisfy the national importance element”

“the record does not contain sufficient evidence to reflect that the area where it will operate is economically depressed”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

• degree · credited
• resume experience · credited
• business plan · discounted

  “does not demonstrate that the company's future staffing levels and tax consulting activity would provide substantial economic benefits in Florida or the United States”

  AAO decision text
• recommendation letter · discounted

  “lacking relevance because it discusses the importance of the Petitioner's industry and occupation rather than addressing how the specific proposed endeavor would satisfy the national importance element”

  AAO decision text
• other · discounted

  “shortages of qualified workers are directly addressed by the U.S. Department of Labor through the labor certification process”

  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
• Occupational shortage argument rejected · p1 — argues a labor shortage — the labor-certification question, not Dhanasar

Notable

AAO withdrew the Director's threshold advanced-degree finding for lack of explanation, yet still dismissed the appeal on prong 1 alone, expressly reserving prongs 2 and 3 even though the Director had found those favorable to the Petitioner.

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
• Matter of Caron Int'l
• Matter of D-R-
• Matter of L-A-C-
• Poursina v. USCIS

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