This is an AAO appeal decision — a case denied once and appealed. It shows how the framework is applied; it is not the filing population.
The petitioner, an IT/computer systems consultant, proposed either to develop and expand his own Florida-based IT consulting company or, alternatively, to seek employment or consulting work with U.S. IT firms such as Citrix, providing virtualization and cloud computing solutions.
Field: computer systems consulting / IT (Citrix and Microsoft virtualization, cloud computing) · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“Here, the Petitioner's proposed endeavor is uncertain.”
“The Petitioner's specific proposed endeavor, therefore, remains unclear.”
“the record does not sufficiently detail the basis for the company's financial and staffing projections, or adequately explain how these projections will be realized”
“such shortages of qualified workers are directly addressed by the U.S. Department of Labor through the labor certification process”
“the relevant question is not the importance of the industry or profession in which the individual will work; instead we focus on the "the specific endeavor that the foreign national proposes to undertake."”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- business plan · discounted
“the record does not sufficiently detail the basis for the company's financial and staffing projections”
AAO decision text - recommendation letter · discounted
“The letter does not contain sufficient information and explanation of the Petitioner's proposed endeavor”
AAO decision text - media · discounted
“they are of limited value in this matter, as the Petitioner's specific proposed endeavor remains unclear”
AAO decision text - resume experience · discounted
“relate to the second prong of the Dhanasar framework, which "shifts the focus from the proposed endeavor to the foreign national"”
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
- Occupational shortage argument rejected · p1 — argues a labor shortage — the labor-certification question, not Dhanasar
Notable
The AAO placed significant weight on the petitioner's shifting description of his proposed endeavor across the initial filing, RFE response, and appeal (company development vs. seeking employment with Citrix or its partners), treating this inconsistency as undermining the specificity required to assess national importance, and invoking material-change principles from Matter of Izummi and Matter of Katigbak.
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. 103.2(b)(1)
- 8 C.F.R. 103.3
- Matter of E-M-
- Matter of Ho
- Matter of Izummi
- Matter of Katigbak
- Matter of L-A-C-
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