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 sought to work as president and lead psychologist of her own company, providing online mental health consultations and teletherapy, launching a psychology internship program, and conducting clinical research.
Field: mental health / psychology · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — addressed
Director found, and AAO agreed, that the Petitioner's foreign diplomas evaluated as equivalent to a bachelor's and master's degree qualified her as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree.
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“a shortage of qualified professionals alone is not sufficient to demonstrate eligibility for the national interest waiver”
“she has not provided sufficient documentary evidence that her proposed endeavor as the president and lead psychologist of her company would impact the mental health industry more broadly rather than benefiting her own company and its clients”
“the business plan does not provide sufficient details of the basis for these projections or adequately explain how these sales and staffing targets will be realized”
“the record lacks sufficient evidence demonstrating that the Petitioner's business will have an impact on the mental health industry or the U.S. economy at a level commensurate with national importance”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- recommendation letter · discounted
“USCIS is responsible for making the final determination regarding a petitioner's eligibility for the benefit sought.”
AAO decision text - business plan · discounted
“the business plan does not provide sufficient details of the basis for these projections or adequately explain how these sales and staffing targets will be realized”
AAO decision text - degree · credited
- certification membership · discounted
“these documents do not support that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor is of national importance”
AAO decision text - resume experience · credited
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
- Employer-specific benefit · p1 — "work furthers my company's product" — value accrues to one firm
- Occupational shortage argument rejected · p1 — argues a labor shortage — the labor-certification question, not Dhanasar
Notable
AAO agreed the Petitioner met the EB-2 advanced degree threshold via foreign diplomas evaluated as bachelor's/master's equivalents, but found the national importance prong dispositive and expressly reserved prongs two and three, citing INS v. Bagamasbad and Matter of L-A-C- for declining to 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. 103.3
- 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(2)
- 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