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 sought to work as an organ transplant coordinator, serving as a member of the transplant team working most closely with organ recipients to help them receive lifesaving organ donations.
Field: organ transplant coordination · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — addressed
The Director determined the Petitioner qualifies for EB-2 as an advanced degree professional; her exceptional-ability claim was deemed moot.
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“The Director stated that the Petitioner did not demonstrate that her endeavor will have prospective potential impact, such as broadly impacting a particular field, enhancing societal welfare, or having significant potential to employ U.S. workers or create other substantial positive economic effects.”
“she does not explain how her clinical transplant coordinator certification and prior discussion of the proposed endeavor adequately demonstrate that her endeavor has national importance.”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- certification membership · discounted
“she does not explain how her clinical transplant coordinator certification and prior discussion of the proposed endeavor adequately demonstrate that her endeavor has national importance.”
AAO decision text
Where this case turned
- 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
AAO withdrew the Director's finding on the substantial merit element of prong 1, crediting the Petitioner's RFE response, but still dismissed the appeal on the separate national importance element of the same prong, 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
- Chen v. INS
- Flores v. Garland
- Matter of L-A-C-
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