The Petitioner, an experienced marketing manager, initially proposed to continue working as a marketing manager for U.S. companies, then later claimed she would develop her own marketing consulting agency in Florida.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“the Petitioner must demonstrate the national importance of her specific, proposed endeavor rather than the importance of marketing managers to the U.S. economy”

“The Petitioner did not offer specific information and evidence to corroborate her assertions that the prospective impact of continuing her work as a marketing manager rises to the level of national importance”

“Without evidence regarding any projected U.S. economic impact or job creation attributable to her future work, the record does not show any benefits to the U.S. regional or national economy”

“the record does not show through supporting documentation how her marketing management stands to sufficiently extend beyond the businesses that might employ her”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

• business plan · discounted

  “we will not consider the Petitioner's materially changed proposed endeavor”

  AAO decision text
• resume experience · discounted

  “The Petitioner's experience and abilities in her field relate to the second prong”

  AAO decision text
• other · discounted

  “the record does not show through supporting documentation how her marketing management stands to sufficiently extend beyond the businesses that might employ her”

  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

Notable

AAO rejected the Petitioner's shift in proposed endeavor (from working for U.S. companies to founding her own marketing consulting agency, introduced only in response to the RFE) under the Izummi/Bardouille 'materially changed facts' doctrine, refusing to consider the later business plan at all and evaluating national importance based solely on the original, more generic endeavor description.

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. 103.2(b)(1)
• 8 C.F.R. 103.3
• Matter of Bardouille
• Matter of Izummi
• Matter of L-A-C-
• Poursina v. USCIS

Cases in adjacent profiles

• The Petitioner, a mechanical engineer, proposed to advance thermal management solutions for high-power, compact, and rel
• The Petitioner, a senior engineering program manager specializing in electromechanical systems, proposed to advance moto
• The Petitioner proposed to provide innovative solutions to optimize freight and vessel operations in the U.S. shipping i
• The Petitioner, a sales manager, proposed an endeavor in the United States for which he sought an EB-2 national interest
• The Petitioner proposed to lead a nationwide initiative to develop and implement a standardized materials management mod