dismissedJAN052024_01B52032024-01-05 · 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, an entrepreneur in nursing, proposed to operate her own company providing nursing home care and assisted housing services to elderly patients, with plans to franchise nationwide and offer telemedicine options.
Field: nursing / home health care · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“the record does not show how expanding her endeavor through franchising and telemedicine will have an impact that extends beyond her clients to the broader field of nursing or home healthcare”
“the United States does not have a shortage of nursing jobs, but of qualified workers to fill them”
“the Petitioner improperly relies upon the importance of the industry as sufficient to establish the national importance of her proposed endeavor”
“There is no additional evidence to establish the Petitioner's experience in research, there are no detailed plans for the research she proposes”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- business plan · discounted
“the record does not show how expanding her endeavor through franchising and telemedicine will have an impact that extends beyond her clients”
AAO decision text - recommendation letter · discounted
“This evidence shows the Petitioner's extensive experience in the field, but does not demonstrate her proposed endeavor's national importance.”
AAO decision text - certification membership · discounted
“This evidence shows the Petitioner's extensive experience in the field, but does not demonstrate her proposed endeavor's national importance.”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“the relevant question is not the importance of the industry or profession in which the individual will work; instead, we focus on the specific endeavor”
AAO decision text
Where this case turned
- Business plan speculative · p1 — projections without a documented basis or steps
- 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
- Occupational shortage argument rejected · p1 — argues a labor shortage — the labor-certification question, not Dhanasar
1,312coded 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
AAO faulted the Petitioner for asserting on appeal that the Director 'mistaken the facts' and 'misinterpreted the law' without pointing to specific examples; also declined to reach EB-2 classification and remaining Dhanasar prongs as the first-prong failure was dispositive.
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 Beneficiary proposed to establish an asset investment management and compliance advisory firm in New York offering c
- The Petitioner proposed to develop and commercialize zeolite-based products in the United States, including agricultural
- The Petitioner proposed to operate a medical billing and healthcare revenue cycle management firm in the United States,
- The Petitioner proposed to establish and lead as CEO a cybersecurity and crisis management company in Florida, offering
- The Petitioner proposed to establish and operate an IT consultancy company in Michigan providing cloud migration, cybers