The Petitioner, a Colombian anti-corruption and investigations specialist, proposed to work for a U.S. police department, assisting crime investigation and evidence-gathering to combat corruption and criminal activity.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“The Petitioner does not demonstrate that her proposed endeavor extends beyond her employer to impact anti-corruption initiatives, the criminal investigations field, or any other industries or the U.S. economy more broadly”

“The record does not suggest, for example, that the Petitioner's anti-corruption and investigations duties would meet the current demand for criminal investigators, address the national criminal investigations professional job shortage”

“The Petitioner's general claims that her anti-corruption and investigations specialist work for a police department will benefit the economy and the social welfare of the United States has not been established through independent and objective evidence”

“merely working in the criminal investigations field as an anti-corruption and investigative specialist for a police department is insufficient to establish the national importance of the proposed endeavor”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

• business plan · discounted

  “The Petitioner's general claims that her anti-corruption and investigations specialist work for a police department will benefit the economy and the social welfare of the United States has not been established”

  AAO decision text
• recommendation letter · discounted

  “the letters lack sufficient details of her dates of employment and do not indicate whether her position was full-time”

  AAO decision text
• degree · discounted

  “the record does not include an official academic record from the university, as required under the criterion”

  AAO decision text
• resume experience · discounted

  “it does not indicate whether her work was full-time, as required under the plain language of the criterion”

  AAO decision text
• certification membership · discounted

  “the record does not demonstrate that the Petitioner has a license to practice the profession or certification for her occupation”

  AAO decision text

Where this case turned

• Economic claims unsupported · p1 — job/revenue projections with no corroborating basis
• Employer-specific benefit · p1 — "work furthers my company's product" — value accrues to one firm
• 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

AAO withdrew Director's threshold finding (advanced degree) but found petitioner failed both the underlying EB-2 classification (neither advanced degree nor exceptional ability established) and Dhanasar prong 1's national importance requirement, treating prong 1 as dispositive and expressly declining 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
• 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(2)
• 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(3)(ii)
• Flores v. Garland
• Kazarian v. USCIS
• Matter of E-M-
• Matter of L-A-C-
• Visinscaia v. Beers

Cases in adjacent profiles

• The Petitioner, a mechanical engineer, proposed to advance thermal management solutions for high-power, compact, and rel
• The Petitioner, a senior engineering program manager specializing in electromechanical systems, proposed to advance moto
• The Petitioner proposed to provide innovative solutions to optimize freight and vessel operations in the U.S. shipping i
• The Petitioner, a sales manager, proposed an endeavor in the United States for which he sought an EB-2 national interest
• The Petitioner proposed to lead a nationwide initiative to develop and implement a standardized materials management mod