The petitioner, an electrical engineer and project manager, proposed to continue working in the engineering design, development, and construction of renewable energy generation systems to improve efficiency and reliability of electricity and energy grid capacity.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“the evidence does not demonstrate that it would have significant potential to employ U.S. workers, have substantial positive economic impact in this country, broadly impact the industry on national or global level beyond his potential employer and customers”

“the referenced evidence and assertions focus on his skills and profession, which relate to Dhanasar's second prong and pertain to whether he is well positioned for his endeavor and "shifts the focus from the proposed endeavor to the foreign national."”

“the importance of a proposed endeavor is determined by its specific potential prospective impact, not by the occupation or industry, in which he proposes to engage based on his qualifications”

“the record lacks detail and probative evidence on the claimed economic impact and hiring potential, such as financial or employment projections, directly attributable to the proposed endeavor”

“the record does not contain persuasive explanation or specific evidence that being an electrical engineer and project manager with development goals in the stated subjects, whether in a STEM field, has broader implications”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

• resume experience · discounted

  “the referenced evidence and assertions focus on his skills and profession, which relate to Dhanasar's second prong”

  AAO decision text
• recommendation letter · discounted

  “the record (primarily including his assertions, support letters, and the general industry reports and articles) does not demonstrate how his proposed endeavor... would have the national or global implications”

  AAO decision text
• other · discounted

  “Other than generally reiterating the importance of the renewable energy industry... the record lacks detailed, objective evidence”

  AAO decision text
• degree · credited

Where this case turned

• 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
• Local, not national scope · p1 — impact confined to clients / a region

Notable

The Director had found prong 1 (merit) and prong 2 satisfied but prong 3 not met; AAO instead found prong 1's national-importance sub-element unmet and treated that as dispositive, expressly declining to reach prongs 2 and 3 despite the Director's differing findings.

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.

• Flores v. Garland
• Matter of E-M-

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