The Petitioner proposed to direct a business consulting agency in Massachusetts offering business plan development, strategic consulting, and financial BPO services to small and medium-sized companies.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“The record in its totality does not show through supporting documentation how the Petitioner's specific services stand to sufficiently extend beyond his prospective clients to impact the industry or the U.S. economy more broadly at a level commensurate with national importance.”

“Although the Petitioner discusses the value and importance of financial management and business consultancy and their impact on the U.S. economy, Dhanasar requires us to focus on the "the specific endeavor that the foreign national proposes to undertake," not the importance of the field, industry, or profession.”

“However, the record does not contain sufficient details and supporting evidence to demonstrate how his company will reach the stated economic impact objectives; how the company will pay for potential workers and business expenses”

“While the business plan forecasts total operating expenses to reach $3.4 million by the fifth year of operation, the record lacks evidence to show adequate investment funds, either from the Petitioner or other entities.”

“the Director noted that a shortage in a particular field does not render the proposed endeavor nationally important.”

“Therefore, the Petitioner has not demonstrated that his company has significant potential to employ U.S. workers or otherwise offer substantial positive economic effects.”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

• business plan · discounted

  “the record does not contain sufficient details and supporting evidence to demonstrate how his company will reach the stated economic impact objectives”

  AAO decision text
• recommendation letter · discounted

  “the letters do not reflect contractual work or investment commitments with the Petitioner's company”

  AAO decision text
• resume experience · discounted

  “the Petitioner's skills, expertise, and abilities relate to the second prong of the Dhanasar framework”

  AAO decision text
• funding · discounted

  “the record lacks evidence to show adequate investment funds, either from the Petitioner or other entities”

  AAO decision text
• other · discounted

  “the submitted documentation, specifically the excerpts of articles and reports discussing entrepreneurship and consultancy industries, were not sufficient to corroborate his assertions”

  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
• Field importance conflated with endeavor · p1 — argues the field matters, not the specific endeavor
• Funding absent · p1 — no documented funding or resources behind the plan
• Occupational shortage argument rejected · p1 — argues a labor shortage — the labor-certification question, not Dhanasar

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 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