The Petitioner, a physical therapist trained in Brazil, proposed to work in the United States providing physical therapy services in functional dermatology and orthopedics, using laser, manual, and kinesiotherapy techniques to treat individual patients.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“in determining national importance, the relevant question is not the importance of the industry or profession in which the individual will work”

“a shortage of qualified professionals alone is not sufficient to demonstrate eligibility for the national interest waiver”

“she has not offered sufficient evidence to establish that her physical therapy services will enable her employer to employ a significant population of workers in an economically depressed area”

“these letters do not provide specific examples of how the Petitioner's work has influenced the physical therapy industry”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

• recommendation letter · discounted

  “these letters do not provide specific examples of how the Petitioner's work has influenced the physical therapy industry”

  AAO decision text
• resume experience · discounted

  “these duties do not illustrate how her proposed endeavor to work in the United States as a physical therapist will have broader implications”

  AAO decision text
• certification membership · ignored
• other · discounted

  “a shortage of qualified professionals alone is not sufficient to demonstrate eligibility for the national interest waiver”

  AAO decision text
• other · discounted

  “Nor has the Petitioner demonstrated that any increase in her employer's revenue as a result of her provision of physical therapy services stands to substantially affect economic activity”

  AAO decision text

Where this case turned

• Economic claims unsupported · p1 — job/revenue projections with no corroborating basis
• Field importance conflated with endeavor · p1 — argues the field matters, not the specific endeavor
• 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 expressly rejects the argument that a national shortage of physical therapists supports national importance, reasoning that DOL's labor certification process, not the NIW, addresses worker shortages; also expressly declines to reach prongs 2 and 3 citing Bagamasbad and Matter of L-A-C-.

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)
• 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