The Petitioner sought to establish a technical solutions consultancy firm offering IT process management, ERP implementation, and business intelligence services to small businesses such as English schools, pet shops, and financial/insurance institutions.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“Although any basic economic activity has the potential to positively impact a local economy, the Petitioner has not demonstrated how the economic activity directly resulting from his proposed endeavor would rise to the level of national importance.”

“However, the business plan does not provide sufficient explanation for the basis of these projections.”

“The Petitioner has not explained how his proposed employment metrics would have impact beyond his business's area of intended operations.”

“While we acknowledge the importance of the fields of business and information technology, the Petitioner did not establish his proposed endeavor would have broader implications to the overall fields to establish its national importance.”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

• business plan · discounted

  “the business plan does not provide sufficient explanation for the basis of these projections”

  AAO decision text
• recommendation letter · ignored

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

The AAO expressly declined to reach the threshold EB-2 classification question even though it flagged a potential deficiency (work experience unrelated to proposed endeavor) not relied upon by the Director, since prong 1 failure was dispositive.

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
• 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(2)
• 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