dismissedDEC132023_01B52032023-12-13 · appeal · Texas 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 psychoanalyst with 14 years of clinical experience, proposed to establish a multidisciplinary clinic providing psychological therapy services with a focus on school-bullying prevention, including counseling, lectures, research, and coaching of students, teachers, and parents.
Field: psychoanalysis / clinical psychology · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — addressed
Director found Petitioner qualifies as advanced degree professional; not disputed on appeal.
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“The Petitioner must demonstrate the national importance of her specific, proposed endeavor of providing her particular counseling services through her business rather than the importance of psychologists or the industry or field.”
“The Petitioner did not offer specific information and evidence to corroborate her assertions that the prospective impact of working as a psychoanalyst in a clinic rises to the level of national importance.”
“The Petitioner provided very general notions of national impacts but did not provide specific information on how her clinic that services clients in a certain area can actually have a national impact.”
“Without evidence regarding any projected U.S. economic impact or job creation directly attributable to her future work operating a clinic, the record does not show that benefits to the regional or national economy resulting from the Petitioner's endeavor would reach the level of "substantial positive economic effects"”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- other · discounted
“The Petitioner did not offer specific information and evidence to corroborate her assertions that the prospective impact of working as a psychoanalyst in a clinic rises to the level of national importance.”
AAO decision text
Where this case turned
- Economic claims unsupported · p1 — job/revenue projections with no corroborating basis
- Endeavor too vague · p1 — described as a job role, not a defined undertaking
- 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
2,501coded 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
Petitioner argued her therapy work could deter school shootings caused by untreated bullying-induced mental breakdowns; AAO found this claim uncorroborated by evidence.
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