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 work as a physical therapist providing specialized services in neurology and education, aiming to impact the field of physical therapy through innovation in the U.S.
Field: physical therapy · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — addressed
Director found Petitioner lacked five years of progressive post-baccalaureate experience for advanced degree equivalency; AAO withdrew this finding, holding letters from former employers met 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(3)(i)(B) requirements, establishing EB-2 eligibility.
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“However, the Petitioner does not provide support for these assertions, nor does the evidence on record establish that her endeavor will directly result in broader implications to the field”
“Generalized conclusory statements that do not identify a specific impact in the field have little probative value.”
“merely working in an important field or profession is insufficient to establish the national importance of the proposed endeavor”
“the Petitioner does not show that her proposed endeavor has significant potential to employ U.S. workers or otherwise offers substantial positive economic effects for our nation”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- resume experience · credited
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
Notable
AAO overturned the Director's threshold EB-2 denial (finding the employment letters sufficient to establish progressive experience equivalency), yet still dismissed the appeal solely on Dhanasar prong 1 national importance grounds, reserving prongs 2 and 3.
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
- 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(2)
- Flores v. Garland
- 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