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 Brazilian-trained cosmetologist/skincare specialist, proposed to conduct research on new cosmetic treatments and equipment, teach and train other aesthetics professionals, publish and present scientific findings, and operate/expand her own cosmetology salon and aesthetics laboratory in the United States.
Field: cosmetology/aesthetics · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — not met
AAO affirmed that the Petitioner's bachelor's degree in accounting did not qualify her as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree because her post-baccalaureate experience was in cosmetology, not accounting, and she lacked five years of progressive experience in the specialty of her degree. However, the AAO found she does meet three of the six exceptional-ability evidentiary criteria (academic record, ten years' experience, license), remanding for the Director to conduct the final merits determination on exceptional ability.
Prong 1 — national importancenot established
“the record does not establish that teaching training courses and serving her salon 's clientele stand to impact the cosmetology field or the aesthetics industry more broadly”
“the Petitioner' s proposed instructional work and the services she intends to provide for her salon' s clientele do not meet the "national importance" element of the first prong of the Dhanasar framework”
AAO decision text
Prong 2 — well positionedestablished
Prong 3 — balance of factorsestablished
How the evidence was treated
- degree · discounted
“the Petitioner's bachelor's degree is in the specialty of accounting, but her employment verification letters indicate that her experience is in the cosmetology field”
AAO decision text - resume experience · credited
- certification membership · credited
- recommendation letter · ignored
“the decision did not mention the other letters of support and industry reports the Petitioner offered under prong three of Dhanasar”
AAO decision text - business plan · ignored
“the Director's decision mentions the Petitioner's submission of "an opinion letter and a business plan," it did not provide an analysis of either document”
AAO decision text
All 6 evidence items
- citations publications · ignored
Where this case turned
- Local, not national scope · p1 — impact confined to clients / a region
Notable
The remand is largely procedural: the AAO found the Director's denial inadequately explained the evidentiary bases for its prong-two and prong-three findings, and had overlooked substantial submitted evidence (letters, articles, industry reports). The AAO independently found, however, that the Petitioner's proposed teaching/salon-clientele activities lack national importance under Dhanasar's first prong, citing Dhanasar itself as precedent for that limitation.
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)
- Poursina v. USCIS
What this case teaches
Analyst reading of the decision text.
Director failed to analyze or explain treatment of substantial evidence (letters, business plans, industry reports) submitted for all three Dhanasar prongs, requiring remand rather than a merits ruling.
Separate locally-scoped service/teaching work from broadly-impactful research; ensure adjudicators address all submitted evidence explicitly to avoid remand for inadequate explanation.
moderate
field_advancement · economic_job_creation · economic_growth_generic
mixed
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