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 nurse, proposed to continue working as a nurse in U.S. hospitals and clinics across specialties such as neonatology, family/community health, and urgent care, while also training other nurses.
Field: nursing · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — not met
AAO withdrew the Director's finding that Petitioner qualified as an advanced degree professional; the credential evaluation combined education and work experience rather than relying on a single foreign equivalent degree, and evidence of exceptional ability was insufficient. Not dispositive since prong 1 failure resolved the appeal.
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“The Petitioner's aim to address nursing shortages in the United States through the national interest waiver process is misplaced.”
“the practice of nursing directly benefits only those individuals benefiting from the Petitioner's administration of nursing care.”
“it is not what duties or what occupation the noncitizen will fill or perform but their actual plan with their occupation and duties that is examined.”
“The writer did not explain how the Petitioner's work would address ashortage of nursing professionals at a national level.”
“the relevant question is not the importance of the field, industry, or profession in which the individual will work”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- recommendation letter · discounted
“the writer mainly focused on the Petitioner's past performance as a nurse, which is not germane”
AAO decision text - resume experience · discounted
“the Petitioner's past performance of their proposed endeavor is not relevant to an evaluation of that endeavor's national importance”
AAO decision text - degree · discounted
“the credential evaluation is not probative to establish the Petitioner's categorical eligibility”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“the industry reports and articles record do not adequately reflect how the Petitioner's endeavor will broadly enhance societal welfare”
AAO decision text
Where this case turned
- 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 withdrew the Director's substantial-merit and threshold EB-2 findings but still found national importance unmet on a different basis, explicitly analogizing nursing to teaching (per Dhanasar's discussion of teaching) as benefiting only a limited group. AAO also explained why Schedule A labor-shortage designation, not NIW, is the intended vehicle for nursing shortages. A footnote misidentifies the endeavor as 'physical therapy' rather than nursing, an apparent drafting error.
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
- INA 203(b)(2)
- Matter of L-A-C-
- Matter of Y-B-
- 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