NIW Bearings
summary_dismissalJUN282017_02B52032017-06-28 · 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 psychiatrist and medical researcher, proposed to establish a psychiatric clinic and mental health education center in the United States to share her clinical knowledge with other medical professionals and patients.

Field: psychiatry / medical research · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

Prong 1 — national importancenot established

“she has not provided sufficient details about the size, location, and staffing of this establishment”
“the Petitioner has not established the implications of her proposed endeavor or its potential prospective impact on the United States”

AAO decision text

Prong 2 — well positionednot established

“the Petitioner has not demonstrated a record of success or progress in her field, or a degree of interest in her work from relevant parties”
“the reference letters discussing the Petitioner's work do not provide sufficient detail explaining how her work renders her well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor”
“she has not provided evidence or information demonstrating a history of success in any similar entrepreneurial endeavors, showing the interest of relevant parties in her proposal, documenting how she will secure funding”

AAO decision text

Prong 3 — balance of factorsnot established

“she has not, for instance, sent information or evidence outlining why a labor certification would be impractical in her case”
“whether the United States would benefit from her contributions even if other U.S. workers are also available; or whether urgency warrants foregoing the labor certification process”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

  • recommendation letter · discounted
    “These are general statements affirming the Petitioner's clinical acumen; however, they do not indicate”
    AAO decision text
  • resume experience · discounted
    “She has not explained whether she developed these treatments, the extent to which they have been used by other interested parties”
    AAO decision text
  • certification membership · discounted
  • business plan · discounted
    “she has not provided sufficient details about the size, location, and staffing of this establishment”
    AAO decision text

Where this case turned

  • Business plan speculative · p1 — projections without a documented basis or steps
  • Endeavor too vague · p1 — described as a job role, not a defined undertaking
  • Business plan speculative · p2 — projections without a documented basis or steps
  • Funding absent · p2 — no documented funding or resources behind the plan
  • Letters conclusory · p2 — letters praise skills in general terms without tracing specific impact
  • Record of success insufficient · p2 — a claimed track record the documents do not establish
  • Derivative of Prong 1/2 failure · p3 — prong three fails only because prongs one or two did — no independent ground
  • Urgency not established · p3 — no reason shown why the benefit cannot wait for labour certification
  • U.S. worker availability · p3 — the impracticality of a labour-market test was asserted, not established
1,358coded 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

The AAO issued a post-Dhanasar RFE (since the petition was adjudicated under the vacated NYSDOT framework at the service-center level) and summarily dismissed the appeal as abandoned when the Petitioner failed to respond, then addressed the merits in the alternative, finding all three Dhanasar prongs unmet without designating any single prong as independently dispositive.

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. 103.2(b)(8)

Cases in adjacent profiles