NIW Bearings
dismissedJAN212026_02B52032026-01-21 · appeal · SCOPS 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 proposed to develop a corporate preventative oral health program (ER ProDental Wellness) deploying mobile clinics within companies to reduce work absenteeism from dental problems, improve employee productivity, and decrease emergency treatment costs, including in underserved areas.

Field: oral health / dental wellness (corporate preventative oral health programs) · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

EB-2 threshold — not met

Petitioner's Colombian 'Titulo de Odontologa' found equivalent only to a U.S. bachelor's degree per AACRAO EDGE, not a first professional degree; specialist certificate found comparable to only 1-2 years of graduate study, not a master's degree; evaluation report discounted as unreliable; transcripts not submitted; only three years of professional experience claimed, insufficient for the bachelor's-plus-five-years pathway; exceptional ability track not asserted and deemed waived.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established

“the Petitioner does not provide evidence in support of these assertions.”
“the Petitioner did not demonstrate how these assertions, even if credible or plausible, would sufficiently extend beyond her prospective clients to significantly benefit these underserved regions.”
“the alleged shortage of occupations or occupational skills does not render her proposed endeavor nationally important under the Dhanasar framework.”
“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 that the foreign national proposes to undertake.'”
“the Petitioner did not corroborate these estimates with independent evidence nor did she explain the significance of these projections.”

AAO decision text

Prong 2 — well positionednot established

“the Petitioner has not established how her education in dentistry has prepared her to pursue her endeavor.”
“she has not provided sufficient documentation that her experience and background have provided her the skills required to advance her proposed endeavor.”
“her employment, recommendation, and expert letters speak little regarding her ability to lead an organization.”
“She has not provided evidence of past successes in related efforts.”
“the underlying record does not contain evidence of potential customers or investors.”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

  • degree · discounted
    “the 'Titulo Profesional represents attainment of a level of education comparable to a bachelor's degree in the United States'”
    AAO decision text
  • other · discounted
    “the unsupported conclusions and discrepancies drawn by the evaluation report raise issue with its reliability.”
    AAO decision text
  • business plan · discounted
    “provides no explanation for these conclusions or corroborating evidence in support.”
    AAO decision text
  • recommendation letter · discounted
    “her employment, recommendation, and expert letters speak little regarding her ability to lead an organization.”
    AAO decision text
  • other · discounted
    “neither the Petitioner nor these experts establish the extent to which her proposed endeavor's methods or strategies improve upon those already available and in use in the United States.”
    AAO decision text
All 6 evidence items
  • other · discounted
    “we will not consider the evidence for the first time on appeal.”
    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
  • 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
  • Education alone insufficient · p2 — degrees offered as positioning — credentials are not a track record
  • Letters conclusory · p2 — letters praise skills in general terms without tracing specific impact
  • No progress evidence · p2 — no documented movement toward the endeavor since filing
  • Record of success insufficient · p2 — a claimed track record the documents do not establish
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 withdrew SCOPS's favorable threshold EB-2 determination, finding the petitioner had not established an advanced degree — a relatively unusual step of reversing a finding in the petitioner's favor. AAO also withdrew SCOPS's favorable Prong 2 finding. New evidence submitted with the appeal (business formation receipt, letter of intent, mobile clinic images) was excluded under Matter of Furtado / Matter of Soriano because a prior RFE had put petitioner on notice. P3 was expressly reserved under INS v. Bagamasbad. The petitioner is a Colombian national dentist/entrepreneur; her specialist certificate in healthcare administration management was found to represent only 1-2 years of graduate study per AACRAO EDGE, not a master's degree.

Cases in adjacent profiles

← Back to the case explorer