dismissedAUG032018_03B52032018-08-03 · appeal · Nebraska Service Center
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, an epidemiologist working on healthcare-associated infection surveillance projects, proposed to continue research and technical guidance to prevent and control infections and antimicrobial resistance, alongside volunteer health-equity outreach work.
Field: epidemiology / public health (healthcare-associated infections) · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — addressed
Director found Petitioner qualified as an advanced degree professional; not disputed on appeal.
Prong 1 — national importanceestablished
“the record does not establish that the Petitioner's activities impact healthcare more broadly, as opposed to being limited to the individuals who attend these community health events”
“they do not meet the "national importance" element of the Dhanasar framework's first prong”
AAO decision text
Prong 2 — well positionednot established · dispositive
“the Petitioner has not submitted documentary evidence to demonstrate that her work on these projects has led to the creation of policies and procedures”
“the results of the Petitioner's work has not been disseminated to others in her field, and thus has not generated interest among relevant parties or substantial positive discourse”
“the Petitioner has not demonstrated a record of success or progress in her field, or a degree of interest in her work from relevant parties”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- recommendation letter · discounted
“this evidence does not show that the Petitioner has achieved progress towards achieving the goals of this research or that she has a track record of success”
AAO decision text - citations publications · discounted
“since that manuscript has yet to be published, the results of the Petitioner's work has not been disseminated to others in her field”
AAO decision text - degree · credited
- resume experience · discounted
“she has not otherwise established that her work constitutes a track record of success”
AAO decision text - certification membership · ignored
Where this case turned
- Local, not national scope · p1 — impact confined to clients / a region
- Citations insufficient · p2 — citation counts without qualitative account of impact
- No progress evidence · p2 — no documented movement toward the endeavor since filing
- Record of success insufficient · p2 — a claimed track record the documents do not establish
- Derivative of Prong 1/2 failure · p3 — prong three fails only because prongs one or two did — no independent ground
1,788coded decisions carry the failure named in this record. A placement shows where your profile sits among them, not what it predicts.See where your profile sits — 90 seconds →
Notable
The AAO reversed the Director's basis for denial, expressly finding prong 1 satisfied for the infection-prevention research (while separately finding the volunteer health-equity work failed prong 1's national importance), but dismissed the appeal on prong 2 grounds, declining to reach prong 3.
Cases in adjacent profiles
- The Petitioner, a senior principal biostatistician, proposes to develop innovative statistical and machine-learning meth
- The Petitioner proposed to use advanced deep learning and machine learning models to create efficient, safe, and well-pe
- The Petitioner proposes to advance machine learning methods for the design and optimization of advanced metamaterials an
- The Petitioner, a postdoctoral chemist, proposed to continue developing high-performance materials and novel synthetic m
- The Petitioner proposes to design novel sensor data processing methods and machine learning algorithms for smart wearabl