The petitioner proposed to work as an accountant and CEO of his own tax planning and customs trade consultancy business in Florida, advising U.S. companies on trade, tax, and supply-chain matters related to Brazil and Latin America.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“the record does not show that the specific proposed endeavor stands to sufficiently extend beyond the company's clients and employees to affect the field or industry more broadly at a level commensurate with national importance.”

“the Petitioner has not provided corroborating evidence to support his claims that his business' activities stand to provide substantial economic and national security benefits to the United States.”

“the record does not sufficiently detail the basis for its financial and staffing projections, or adequately explain how these projections will be realized.”

“merely working in the accounting, finance, and international trade fields or starting a tax planning and customs trade consulting business to support these industries is insufficient to establish the national importance”

“Since the identified basis for denial is dispositive of the Petitioner's appeal, we decline to reach and hereby reserve the Petitioner's appellate arguments regarding his eligibility under the second and third prongs.”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

• business plan · discounted

  “the record does not sufficiently detail the basis for its financial and staffing projections, or adequately explain how these projections will be realized”

  AAO decision text
• recommendation letter · discounted

  “these documents relate to the second prong of the Dhanasar framework”

  AAO decision text
• resume experience · discounted

  “his reliance on his academic credentials and professional experience to establish the national importance of his proposed endeavor is misplaced”

  AAO decision text
• degree · discounted

  “the record does not demonstrate that the Petitioner has at least five years of progressive post-baccalaureate experience following his bachelor's degree”

  AAO decision text
• other · discounted

  “merely working in the accounting, finance, and international trade fields...is insufficient to establish the national importance of the proposed endeavor”

  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
• 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

AAO withdrew the Director's favorable threshold finding sua sponte, giving the decision two independent alternate bases for dismissal (failed threshold EB-2 classification and failed prong 1), and expressly declined to reach prongs 2 and 3.

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
• INA 203(b)(2)
• Matter of E-M-
• Matter of L-A-C-
• Poursina v. USCIS

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