dismissedJUN142024_04B52032024-06-14 · appeal · Texas 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, a psychologist, sought to train health professionals to use neuroscience-based tools to evaluate, diagnose, and rehabilitate athletes struggling with mental health, drawing on her clinical neuropsychology background.
Field: clinical neuropsychology / mental health services for athletes · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — addressed
Director determined Petitioner qualified as an advanced degree professional; not disputed on appeal.
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“the record does not indicate that it has national importance”
“the alleged shortage of occupations or occupational skills does not render her proposed endeavor nationally important under the Dhanasar framework”
“the Petitioner did not sufficiently detail or demonstrate how her particular proposed endeavor would have any projected U.S. economic impact or job creation”
“the Petitioner does not discuss or document any previous experience undertaking a similar high impact project, or detail how the project would be conducted and expanded nationwide”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- recommendation letter · discounted
“the Director examined the letters of support for the national importance prong instead of the public documents”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“cover mental health disorders in general, rather than establishing the national importance of her particular professional services”
AAO decision text
Where this case turned
- 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
- Occupational shortage argument rejected · p1 — argues a labor shortage — the labor-certification question, not Dhanasar
2,589coded 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 explicitly frames the national importance failure as an independent and alternate basis for dismissal, and cites INS v. Bagamasbad and Matter of L-A-C- to justify declining to reach 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.
- 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