The petitioner sought to expand his Colombia-based human resources and organizational development consulting company into Florida, providing HR consulting services primarily to small and medium-sized businesses.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“such evidence does not demonstrate how the Petitioner's specific proposed endeavor stands to impact the broader field or otherwise establish its national importance”

“the record does not contain sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the area where it will operate is economically depressed”

“The record does not support that the creation of 30 additional jobs in the human resources and organizational development sector...will have a substantial economic benefit commensurate with the national importance element”

“the letter, like the evidence discussed above, focuses on the importance of the Petitioner's industry, occupation, and past professional achievements, rather than addressing how the specific proposed endeavor would satisfy the national importance element”

“A determination regarding the claimed national importance of a specific proposed endeavor cannot be inferred based on the Petitioner's past achievements, just as it cannot be inferred based on general claims about the importance of a given field or industry.”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

• business plan · discounted

  “the record does not contain sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the area where it will operate is economically depressed”

  AAO decision text
• recommendation letter · discounted

  “much of the content of the expert opinion letter is lacking relevance to the issue at hand”

  AAO decision text
• resume experience · discounted

  “the Petitioner's expertise acquired through his employment relates to the second prong of the Dhanasar framework”

  AAO decision text
• other · discounted

  “such evidence does not demonstrate how the Petitioner's specific proposed endeavor stands to impact the broader field”

  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
• Letters conclusory · p1 — letters praise skills in general terms without tracing specific impact

Notable

The AAO's analysis is notable for explicitly distinguishing between evidence of industry/field importance versus the specific endeavor's national importance, and for rejecting the 'economically depressed area' argument for lack of specific support despite reference to Florida generally.

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 Caron Int'l
• Matter of D-R-
• Matter of L-A-C-
• Poursina v. USCIS

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