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 physician, initially proposed to work as a medical researcher across several medical specialties, but later shifted her stated endeavor to practicing family medicine, operating a medical supply business, and franchising medical clinics in underserved areas.
Field: medicine · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — addressed
The Director's RFE noted the need to show EB-2 eligibility but he never requested additional evidence or stated a conclusion on whether the Petitioner qualified as an advanced-degree professional or individual of exceptional ability; AAO remanded for the Director to analyze this, including whether she has five years of progressive post-baccalaureate experience given her foreign medical diploma was evaluated as equivalent to a U.S. bachelor's degree rather than an advanced degree.
Prong 1 — national importanceestablished
How the evidence was treated
- degree · discounted
“indicate[s] that [the Petitioner] satisfied requirements substantially like those required toward the completion of a Bachelor of Medicine”
AAO decision text - business plan · ignored
“a petitioner may not make material changes to a petition in an effort to make a deficient petition conform to USCIS requirements”
AAO decision text
This record is one of thousands, each coded for the reasons it turned. A placement shows where your profile sits in that record, not what it predicts. See where your profile sits — 90 seconds →
Notable
AAO applied the material-change doctrine from Matter of Izummi to an NIW petition, holding that the Petitioner's shift from a proposed medical-research endeavor to a combination of clinical practice, medical supply business ownership, and clinic franchising constituted an impermissible material change; the Director had also failed to make any express finding on threshold EB-2 eligibility despite requesting such evidence in the RFE. The case was remanded without the AAO reaching a decision on any of the three Dhanasar prongs.
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)
- 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(3)(ii)
- Matter of Izummi
What this case teaches
Analyst reading of the decision text.
Petitioner materially changed her proposed endeavor in RFE response (from medical research to license/business/franchise), barring consideration of new evidence; Director also failed to rule on underlying EB-2 eligibility, requiring remand.
Keep the proposed endeavor consistent and specific throughout adjudication; RFE responses must supplement, not replace, the original endeavor to avoid a material-change bar.
vague
public_health · economic_job_creation · geographic_or_shortage_area
person_focused
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