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 nurse auditor, sought EB-2 classification and a national interest waiver for a proposed endeavor related to her nurse auditing work, which the Director and AAO found not established as nationally important.
Field: nursing/healthcare auditing · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — not met
On the prior appeal, the AAO found the Petitioner's employment history insufficient to demonstrate progressive experience for EB-2 eligibility, though this was not the basis for dismissal.
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“we adopted and affirmed the Director's decision as to the finding that the Petitioner did not demonstrate the national importance of the proposed endeavor”
“the Director incorrectly conflated the proposed employment with the proposed endeavor and did not sufficiently consider the evidence in the record”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- resume experience · discounted
“these facts do not address the basis for our dismissal of the Petitioner's appeal”
AAO decision text - recommendation letter · discounted
“we are unpersuaded by this claim”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“the evidence is not material to the basis of our decision to dismiss”
AAO decision text - motion resubmission · discounted
“merely reargue facts and issues we have already considered in our previous decision”
AAO decision text
Where this case turned
- Employer-specific benefit · p1 — "work furthers my company's product" — value accrues to one firm
- Endeavor too vague · p1 — described as a job role, not a defined undertaking
Notable
The Petitioner argued it was legal error for the AAO to consider recommendation letters submitted for Dhanasar prong 2 as also relevant to prong 1's national importance analysis, citing Love Korean Church v. Chertoff (9th Cir.); the AAO rejected this cross-prong evidentiary argument as not supported by the cited case.
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. 103.5(a)(1)(ii)
- 8 C.F.R. 103.5(a)(2)
- 8 C.F.R. 103.5(a)(3)
- 8 C.F.R. 103.5(a)(4)
- 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(2)
- Matter of Coelho
- Matter of O-S-G-
Cases in adjacent profiles
- The Petitioner, an aircraft mechanic and instructor, proposed to enhance aviation maintenance training programs, support
- The Petitioner seeks EB-2 classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree with a national inter
- The petitioner sought an EB-2 national interest waiver of the job offer requirement, but the substance of the proposed e
- The Beneficiary, sponsored by a private airline, sought EB-2 classification as an individual of exceptional ability in a
- The petitioner sought an EB-2 national interest waiver as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree; the sp