All Cases

The petitioner proposes to operate a human resource consulting company providing talent acquisition, customized employee training, HR strategy development, and organizational consulting. The work aims to improve organizational effectiveness, close skills gaps, and enhance operational efficiency for small and medium-sized businesses in sectors like healthcare and technology.

The petitioner proposes to work as a management analyst and entrepreneur in the field of human resources management in the United States.

The petitioner proposes to establish a human resources and business management services company to provide services to small and midsize enterprises (SMEs) in the United States. This endeavor aims to drive economic growth and social equity through supportive policies and the implementation of effective training programs, enhancing sustainable and ethical labor practices.

The petitioner proposes to establish and serve as the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of a consulting firm, I I, id IFlorida, dedicated to providing management-consulting services with a strong emphasis on human resources, finance, and accounting. The firm intends to serve small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) needing assistance with administrative, financial, and commercial restructuring, and educational institutions seeking expert guidance to enhance operational efficiency and overall performance.

The motion to reconsider was dismissed because the petitioner failed to establish that the previous decision was based on an incorrect application of law or policy. The AAO found that the petitioner's arguments regarding the sufficiency of affidavits as secondary evidence, their ability to resolve discrepancies, and the materiality of discrepancies were already addressed and rejected in prior motions. The decision emphasized the requirement for independent, objective evidence to resolve inconsistencies, citing Matter of Ho, and stated that a motion to reconsider is not a process to resubmit the same arguments.

The motion to reconsider was dismissed because the Petitioner failed to establish that the prior decision was based on an incorrect application of law or policy. The AAO found that the Petitioner did not demonstrate her proposed endeavor is of national importance under Dhanasar's first prong, and the same evidence and assertions did not warrant reconsideration.

The petitioner's proposed endeavor involves a company that anticipates hiring eight employees by the end of year five and projects sales of $202,720 in year one, increasing to $547,254 in year five. The endeavor aims to provide economic benefits through business activity and potential employment.

The petitioner proposes to work as a human resources and organizational development professional, creating methodologies and organizational roadmaps to detail business/strategic goals for organizations. Her endeavor aims to enhance the effectiveness and readiness of employees in U.S. Foreign Service and global development institutions, focusing on talent pipeline planning, human capital development, and work readiness training, with a special emphasis on youth-at-risk and minority groups.

The Petitioner proposes to start a company specializing in human resources, in which she would serve as general manager and lead consultant. This company intends to work with a broad spectrum of individual clients at every stage of their career development, focus on diversity and inclusion by offering workshops on workplace skills to vulnerable populations (such as youth from disadvantaged backgrounds), and provide aspiring entrepreneurs with support.