The Petitioner sought to operate a consultancy business in the U.S. advising small- and medium-sized enterprises on financial management, operational risk, corporate governance, and strategic growth using quantum-based valuation models.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“the fact that a central tenant of his proposed endeavor is a lone business venture-a consultancy firm-must be considered”

“they do not serve as evidence to show how the Petitioner would provide consultancy services to small- and medium-sized businesses at a scale that would have a national impact”

“the record does not include a plan or other indication of how the Petitioner will operate a consultancy company that will impact businesses or the economy at the level of national importance”

“The Petitioner has not demonstrated that the endeavor he proposes to undertake has significant potential to employ U.S. workers or otherwise offers substantial positive economic effects for the nation”

“Absent probative evidence to show the realistic potential of the Petitioner's company to operate at all, it is not evident that the company will generate revenue to create jobs”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

• recommendation letter · discounted

  “letters of recommendation... do not speak to the national importance of the Petitioner's specific endeavor to operate a consultancy business”

  AAO decision text
• other · discounted

  “they do not serve as evidence to show how the Petitioner would provide consultancy services... at a scale that would have a national impact”

  AAO decision text
• business plan · discounted

  “the record does not include a plan or other indication of how the Petitioner will operate a consultancy company”

  AAO decision text
• resume experience · discounted

  “letters of recommendation, while demonstrative of the Petitioner's career success in the field of finance, do not speak to the national importance”

  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
• Endeavor too vague · p1 — described as a job role, not a defined undertaking
• Local, not national scope · p1 — impact confined to clients / a region

Notable

AAO expressly declined to reach prongs 2 and 3, resolving the appeal solely on prong 1 national importance, citing Bagamasbad and Matter of L-A-C- for declining to address unnecessary issues.

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 L-A-C-
• Poursina v. USCIS

Cases in adjacent profiles

• The Petitioner proposed to work as an IT consultant in the United States, providing cybersecurity and digital transforma
• The petitioner proposed to establish his own company providing specialized business consultancy, auditing, and training
• The petitioner proposed to work as a consultant engineer through his own company, specializing in development projects t
• The Petitioner proposed to start a project management consultancy in the United States that would help small and mid-siz
• The Petitioner proposed to establish a legal consultancy in the United States focused on alternative dispute resolution