The Petitioner, an industrial engineer, initially proposed opening a small electroplating (gold plating) business employing about 10 workers, then substantially revised this on RFE to a production/engineering consulting firm with offices in three states employing 28 people.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“The Petitioner did not explain how he would effect large-scale industrial engineering reforms by operating "[a] small production plant in the area of gold plating."”

“These traits are inherent to the Petitioner's occupation, but do not show that the Petitioner's specific proposed endeavor - as opposed to the collective impact of all industrial engineers - has national importance.”

“The issue is not the aggregate size of those markets, but rather the importance of the Petitioner's specific proposed endeavor, working with individual customers within those markets.”

“General statistics about various industries do not suffice in this regard.”

“The Petitioner has not adequately explained how his endeavor will increase the supply of such workers, or how he will be able to fill the new jobs that he seeks to create in the face of such a shortage.”

AAO decision text

Prong 2 — well positionedestablished

“This very significant change casts doubt on the extent to which the Petitioner had made any concrete plans to implement his proposed endeavor prior to the petition's filing date.”

“Consultancy plans drawn up after the Petitioner received the RFE cannot show that he was well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor on the filing date.”

“He claimed no experience running an industrial engineering consultancy firm as described in his revised endeavor.”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

• business plan · discounted

  “A petitioner may not make material changes to a petition that has already been filed in an effort to make an apparently deficient petition conform to USCIS requirements.”

  AAO decision text
• recommendation letter · discounted

  “The advisory letter does not appear to discuss the same proposed endeavor that the Petitioner described in his own introductory statement.”

  AAO decision text
• resume experience · discounted

  “The record does not include contemporaneous documentation such as payroll records that might shed more light on the nature of the Petitioner's employment.”

  AAO decision text
• other · discounted

  “The submitted materials provided no information about the specific proposed endeavor.”

  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
• Occupational shortage argument rejected · p1 — argues a labor shortage — the labor-certification question, not Dhanasar
• Business plan speculative · p2 — projections without a documented basis or steps
• Record of success insufficient · p2 — a claimed track record the documents do not establish

Notable

The AAO highlighted a very substantial change in the proposed endeavor between filing (electroplating shop) and RFE response (three-state engineering consultancy), treating this as both a material-change problem under Matter of Izummi and evidence undermining prong 2, despite prong 2 not being at issue on appeal. The AAO also flagged unresolved inconsistencies in the Petitioner's claimed overlapping full-time employment history (two jobs 90 miles apart simultaneously, and conflicting job titles) as a credibility concern, though it did not rest the decision on this.

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
• 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(2)
• Flores v. Garland
• Matter of Izummi
• 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