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 proposed to work as a first surgical assistant to an oral surgeon, assisting in dental surgical procedures to provide patient care and safety.
Field: dentistry/oral surgery · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“his recommendation letter does not contain sufficient information and explanation, nor does the record include adequate corroborating evidence, to show that her initial proposed endeavor offers broader implications in the field or substantial positive economic effects for our nation that rise to the level of national importance.”
“we are not persuaded by the argument that the Petitioner's initial proposed endeavor has national importance due to the shortage of workers in her field.”
“the Petitioner, however, has not demonstrated how the potential prospective impact of her initial proposed endeavor stands to offer broader implications in her field or to generate substantial positive economic effects.”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- recommendation letter · discounted
“does not contain sufficient information and explanation, nor does the record include adequate corroborating evidence, to show that her initial proposed endeavor offers broader implications in the field or substantial positive economic effects”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
- motion resubmission · discounted
“the Petitioner has not provided new facts to establish that we erred in dismissing the prior motion.”
AAO decision text
Where this case turned
- Economic claims unsupported · p1 — job/revenue projections with no corroborating basis
- Endeavor too vague · p1 — described as a job role, not a defined undertaking
- Occupational shortage argument rejected · p1 — argues a labor shortage — the labor-certification question, not Dhanasar
Notable
The AAO discusses its own vacated NYSDOT precedent, cited by the Petitioner, and reiterates that occupational shortages are addressed via labor certification rather than NIW national importance. No threshold EB-2 or prong 2/3 analysis was reached; the case turned entirely on the AAO's prior national importance finding under prong 1, which the motions failed to disturb.
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. 103.5(a)(1)(i)
- 8 C.F.R. 103.5(a)(1)(ii)
- 8 C.F.R. 103.5(a)(2)
- 8 C.F.R. 103.5(a)(3)
- 8 C.F.R. 103.5(a)(4)
- Matter of Coelho
What this case teaches
Analyst reading of the decision text.
Petitioner failed on motion to present new facts or legal error showing the initial proposed endeavor had national importance; evidence remained person-focused, not endeavor-focused.
On motion, submit new endeavor-specific evidence of broad field/economic impact and scale, not additional personal-qualification letters, to overcome prong-1 denial.
vague
public_health · geographic_or_shortage_area · field_advancement
person_focused
Cases in adjacent profiles
- The Petitioner, a pharmacist, proposed to work in the United States through her own company providing pharmaceutical reg
- The Petitioner, a Brazilian-trained physiotherapist, proposed to work as a physical therapist and entrepreneur in the Un
- The Petitioner, a resident physician in New York holding a Chinese bachelor of medicine (MBBS) degree found equivalent t
- The Petitioner, a music therapist, proposed to establish and expand music therapy services and community music programs
- The Petitioner, a physical therapist, proposed to work as a physical therapist in the United States while operating his