The Petitioner, a physical therapist, proposed to provide physical therapy rehabilitation services and promote the health and wellbeing of residents in the Central Florida area.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“This demonstrates the field of physical therapy is important; however, this does not necessarily establish the national importance of the proposed endeavor.”

“Much of the Petitioner's evidence relates to the importance of the physical therapy profession or field, rather than the national importance of a specific proposed endeavor.”

“The record does not suggest, for example, that the Petitioner's patient care duties would meet the current demand for physical therapy, address the national physical therapist shortage, or otherwise operate on a scale rising to the level of national importance.”

“Neither the Petitioner nor the authors of the letters offer a detailed explanation of what she developed, how her talent is unique, or what innovations she offers.”

“The Petitioner has not provided sufficient independent and objective evidence of these methods, solutions, talents, protocols, and techniques.”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

• recommendation letter · discounted

  “Neither the Petitioner nor the authors of the letters offer a detailed explanation of what she developed, how her talent is unique, or what innovations she offers.”

  AAO decision text
• citations publications · discounted

  “the importance of the field does not necessarily establish the national importance of the proposed endeavor.”

  AAO decision text
• resume experience · credited
• other · discounted

  “This demonstrates the field of physical therapy is important; however, this does not necessarily establish the national importance of the proposed endeavor.”

  AAO decision text

Where this case turned

• Citations insufficient · p1 — citation counts without qualitative account of impact
• 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
• Local, not national scope · p1 — impact confined to clients / a region
• Occupational shortage argument rejected · p1 — argues a labor shortage — the labor-certification question, not Dhanasar

Notable

AAO independently resolved the threshold EB-2 classification issue (advanced degree professional) that the Director had not addressed, before proceeding to deny on Dhanasar prong 1 alone. AAO analogized to its own reasoning in Dhanasar regarding teaching activities not having broader field impact.

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
• Matter of L-A-C-
• Poursina v. USCIS

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