dismissedJAN112024_05B52032024-01-11 · 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.
A Brazilian social worker proposed to continue social-work-related activities in the U.S., coordinating multidisciplinary assistance teams, running a 'Server Central' project to reduce public employee absences, and supporting healthcare clinics to improve efficiency and revenues.
Field: social work / healthcare administration · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — addressed
Director and AAO agreed Petitioner qualifies as an advanced degree professional; this was not disputed on appeal.
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“The plan and letters also offer a vague depiction of her endeavor as a whole”
“the record does not contain sufficient information about the project or how it relates to the Petitioner's endeavor”
“the record does not show that benefits to the U.S. regional or national economy resulting from the Petitioner's pursuits in as a social worker would reach the level of "substantial positive economic effects"”
“she does not explain how her work will address a national talent shortage or affect the field of social work or the healthcare industry”
“She does not explain how her work will have a positive impact on entities outside of that of an immediate employer”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- business plan · discounted
“she does not explain how her employment as a social worker would result in an impact of the scope and scale contemplated under the Dhanasar framework”
AAO decision text - resume experience · discounted
“the Petitioner's knowledge, skills, and experience in her field relate to the second prong of the Dhanasar framework”
AAO decision text
Where this case turned
- Economic claims unsupported · p1 — job/revenue projections with no corroborating basis
- Employer-specific benefit · p1 — "work furthers my company's product" — value accrues to one firm
- 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
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
AAO noted the Petitioner failed to specify how the Director erred as required by 8 C.F.R. 103.3(a)(1)(v), and expressly declined to reach the second and third prongs since 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.
- Matter of L-A-C-
- Poursina v. USCIS
Cases in adjacent profiles
- The Petitioner, an aircraft mechanic and instructor, proposed to enhance aviation maintenance training programs, support
- The Petitioner seeks EB-2 classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree with a national inter
- The petitioner sought an EB-2 national interest waiver of the job offer requirement, but the substance of the proposed e
- The Beneficiary, sponsored by a private airline, sought EB-2 classification as an individual of exceptional ability in a
- The petitioner sought an EB-2 national interest waiver as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree; the sp