dismissedAUG132021_02B52032021-08-13 · 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, a registered nurse and doctorate-prepared nurse educator, proposed to continue working as a clinical RN and part-time nursing instructor while conducting research on falls with major injury (FMI) among nursing home residents.
Field: nursing / nursing education · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — addressed
The record demonstrates the Petitioner qualifies as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree; not disputed.
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“the record does not establish that her clinical work and nursing instructor role would impact the nursing field and healthcare industry more broadly, as opposed to being limited to the patients she serves and the nursing students she teaches”
“she has not shown the amount of time she intends to devote, if any, to conducting research, nor has she provided evidence specific to the FMI research projects”
“the record does not show that the research work the Petitioner proposes to undertake, will offer original innovations to advance the aforementioned industry, or that it otherwise will have wider implications in her field”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- recommendation letter · discounted
“the submitted letters do not provide sufficient information regarding the specific research projects that the Petitioner will engage in or explain the national importance”
AAO decision text - degree · credited
Where this case turned
- Endeavor too vague · p1 — described as a job role, not a defined undertaking
- 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
1,581coded 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 Director's decision was internally inconsistent (finding prong 1 met but then denying discretion), which the AAO expressly withdrew and corrected sua sponte, ultimately finding prong 1 not met on national importance despite crediting substantial merit.
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.
- INA 203(b)(2)
- 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