The Petitioner, a construction professional, proposed to form a U.S. consulting firm to design and manage sustainable, energy-efficient construction projects using methodologies such as REVIT-BIM.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“The determination of national importance does not focus on the importance of environmental sustainability in construction... but 'focuses on the specific endeavor that the foreign national proposes to undertake.'”

“he did not elaborate on these projections or provide evidence supporting the need for these additional employees”

“these projections are not supported by details showing their basis or an explanation of how they will be achieved”

“the record does not indicate that... LLC stands to employ a significant number of U.S. workers or to otherwise provide 'substantial positive economic effects'”

AAO decision text

Prong 3 — balance of factorsnot established · dispositive

“The Petitioner, however, has not demonstrated that his contributions supersede the benefits of protecting the domestic labor supply inherent in the labor certification process.”

“The Petitioner has not shown that he offers contributions of such value that, on balance, it would be beneficial to the United States to waive the job offer and labor certification requirements even assuming that other qualified U.S. workers are available.”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

• business plan · discounted

  “these projections are not supported by details showing their basis or an explanation of how they will be achieved”

  AAO decision text
• recommendation letter · discounted

  “It is insufficient to claim an endeavor has national importance or would create a broad impact without providing evidence to substantiate such claims.”

  AAO decision text
• media · discounted

  “none of the articles mention the Petitioner or his company, or otherwise speak to the potential prospective impact of his specific proposed construction projects”

  AAO decision text
• degree · credited
• resume experience · credited

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
• Derivative of Prong 1/2 failure · p3 — prong three fails only because prongs one or two did — no independent ground
• U.S. worker availability · p3 — the impracticality of a labour-market test was asserted, not established

Notable

AAO agreed with SCOPS on the advanced-degree threshold but affirmatively withdrew SCOPS' unchallenged finding that the endeavor had national importance, reaching that issue sua sponte and making it, along with prong three, an independent alternate basis for dismissal; prong two was expressly reserved under INS v. Bagamasbad.

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

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