dismissedJAN102024_04B52032024-01-10 · 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 Brazilian-trained physical therapist and Pilates instructor, proposed to continue providing physical therapy and Pilates services in the U.S. through her own newly formed LLC firm.
Field: physical therapy · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — addressed
AAO agreed with Director that Petitioner qualifies as an advanced degree professional based on her foreign degree equivalency plus five years of progressive experience.
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“Her five-year projections of $2. 77 million in revenues and employment of 35 workers indicates that her business would lack the size or scope to substantially affect the national economy.”
“The Director found insufficient evidence that the economic and healthcare benefits from the Petitioner's proposed endeavor would reach beyond her firm, its employees, and its patients.”
“The Petitioner has not demonstrated that her proposed endeavor has national importance.”
“Thus, the Petitioner's education, training, and experience do not establish her venture's national importance.”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- degree · credited
- resume experience · credited
- business plan · discounted
“her business would lack the size or scope to substantially affect the national economy”
AAO decision text - recommendation letter · discounted
“the Petitioner's education, training, and experience do not establish her venture's national importance”
AAO decision text
Where this case turned
- Business plan speculative · p1 — projections without a documented basis or steps
- Economic claims unsupported · p1 — job/revenue projections with no corroborating basis
- 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 expressly declined to reach prong 3 (benefits of waiver) after finding prong 1 dispositive, citing INS v. Bagamasbad and Matter of L-A-C- for the proposition that agencies need not reach unnecessary issues.
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. 204.5(k)(2)
- INA 203(b)(2)
- Matter of L-A-C-
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