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 PhD-holding computer science instructor, proposed to conduct research on the mental models of novice computer programmers and AI learners, developing assessment tools to reduce failure rates and improve STEM/AI education, separate from her assistant teaching professor employment.
Field: computer science education / mental models of computer programmers · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — addressed
SCOPS and AAO agreed the Petitioner qualifies as an advanced degree professional based on her PhD in computing and information systems.
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“her project descriptions are brief summaries, without specific details or evidence supporting her claims of their impacts”
“the importance of an industry or field, or an expected increase in the need for skilled workers in a specific field, is not sufficient to meet the national importance requirement under the Dhanasar framework”
“Much of the evidence in the record and the Petitioner's arguments focus on the importance of the field of STEM and AI”
“the Petitioner has not provided the level of specific details or documentation as required under Dhanasar to support her claims”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- recommendation letter · discounted
“her former advisors mainly focus on her previous research... do not identify or address her specific proposed endeavor”
AAO decision text - resume experience · discounted
“neither the Petitioner nor her employer provide specific details of these research initiatives”
AAO decision text - citations publications · discounted
“such previous work mainly relates to whether she is well-positioned to advance her endeavor under Dhanasar's second prong”
AAO decision text - degree · credited
- other · discounted
“the importance of an industry or field... is not sufficient to meet the national importance requirement”
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
- Occupational shortage argument rejected · p1 — argues a labor shortage — the labor-certification question, not Dhanasar
Notable
The AAO explicitly compared the Petitioner's evidence to the original Dhanasar petitioner's (hypersonic propulsion) level of specificity and government funding to illustrate the evidentiary gap, and clarified that SCOPS' reference to her as an 'assistant teaching professor' was not a mischaracterization of her proposed research endeavor.
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
- Flores v. Garland
- Matter of E-M-
- Matter of L-A-C-
- USCIS Policy Manual F.5(D)(2)
What this case teaches
Analyst reading of the decision text.
Petitioner failed to provide specific, corroborated evidence linking her particular research projects to a nationally significant impact, relying instead on general STEM/AI field importance and unsubstantiated assertions.
Tie the specific endeavor's projected outputs to concrete, quantifiable national-level impact with independent corroboration—don't rely on field importance or personal credentials alone.
moderate
stem_positive_factor · us_competitiveness · economic_job_creation · field_advancement
person_focused
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