The Petitioner, a teacher, sought to establish and operate a business in Florida offering English language instruction to non-native English speakers, particularly legal immigrant communities, serving as both teacher and CEO.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“the evidence does not establish that operating and teaching at an English language instruction business will have broader implications or influence in the field that will rise to the level of national importance.”

“the record does not establish that the endeavor will have a measurable impact beyond the immediate community it serves to reach the level of national or even global impact.”

“they primarily offer general endorsements without sufficiently demonstrating how her specific proposed endeavor will impact the field on a national scale or significantly influence the field.”

“the Petitioner does not provide sufficient detail of the basis of these projections or adequately explain how these staffing targets and revenue forecasts will be realized.”

“Merely working in an important field and the endeavor's alignment with government initiatives alone is insufficient for national importance.”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

• business plan · discounted

  “the Petitioner does not provide sufficient detail of the basis of these projections or adequately explain how these staffing targets and revenue forecasts will be realized.”

  AAO decision text
• recommendation letter · discounted

  “they primarily offer general endorsements without sufficiently demonstrating how her specific proposed endeavor will impact the field on a national scale”

  AAO decision text
• other · discounted

  “although the Petitioner's endeavor may address an important social issue, the record does not establish that the endeavor will have a measurable impact beyond the immediate community”

  AAO decision text
• resume experience · ignored

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
• Letters conclusory · p1 — letters praise skills in general terms without tracing specific impact
• Local, not national scope · p1 — impact confined to clients / a region

Notable

The AAO cited Dhanasar's own facts (teaching activities not rising to national importance) as a direct analogy against the Petitioner. AAO expressly reserved and declined to reach prongs 2 and 3 as moot given the dispositive prong 1 failure.

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
• 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