The Petitioner sought to continue operating his own electrical contracting/construction company in Florida, which develops commercial, industrial, and residential electrical projects with a focus on sustainability certifications.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“the relevant question is not the importance of the industry, field, or profession in which an individual will work; instead, to assess national importance, we focus on the "specific endeavor that the [noncitizen] proposes to undertake."”

“While such evidence can be helpful in establishing the potential need for and interest in construction contracting businesses such as the Petitioner's, this primarily speaks to the substantial merit of the proposed endeavor”

“the Petitioner did not demonstrate that this number of jobs created, even considering the claimed "indirect" jobs, has the potential to provide substantial economic benefits at a level commensurate with national importance”

“the Petitioner did not provide evidence to support the claim that the benefits to the regional or national economy from these business operations would reach the level of "substantial positive economic effects" contemplated by Matter of Dhanasar”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

• business plan · discounted

  “the Petitioner did not provide evidence to support the claim that the benefits to the regional or national economy from these business operations would reach the level of "substantial positive economic effects"”

  AAO decision text
• contract revenue · discounted

  “these agreements help show some of the business operations of the company, they do not establish that these operations have the potential to provide substantial positive economic effects”

  AAO decision text
• resume experience · credited
• certification membership · 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
• Occupational shortage argument rejected · p1 — argues a labor shortage — the labor-certification question, not Dhanasar

Notable

AAO affirmed the Petitioner's exceptional-ability qualification but dismissed solely on Dhanasar prong 1, expressly declining to reach prongs 2 and 3 (Bagamasbad doctrine). The decision distinguishes industry-wide claims (labor shortage, STEM importance, climate change) from endeavor-specific impact, rejecting the Petitioner's attempt to analogize his sustainability practices to Dhanasar's 'improved manufacturing processes' example.

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
• USCIS Policy Manual F.5(B)(2)

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