The Petitioner, a Brazilian-trained physician, initially proposed to work in the U.S. as a 'medical scientist' conducting research on human disease and health improvement, though he later submitted a revised plan describing clinical medical practice instead.

Prong 2 — well positionednot established · dispositive

“The Petitioner claims no prior experience as a medical scientist who conducts research.”

“These letters, and the Petitioner's own resume, do not indicate that the Petitioner has any prior experience in medical research.”

“The writers of the letters attest to the Petitioner's skill as a physician... but they show no awareness of the Petitioner's plans to pursue research rather than medical practice.”

“Rather, it represents a major material change, from one occupation (medical researcher) to another (physician).”

“the Petitioner had not shown any plans, progress, financial support or other . . . commitments to drive the endeavor forward.”

AAO decision text

Prong 3 — balance of factorsestablished

“Dhanasar does not provide for shortage-based waivers, because the labor certification process is the means by which the Department of Labor confirms the unavailability of qualified U.S. workers.”

“The Petitioner cannot sidestep these statutory and regulatory requirements and, instead, seek a shortage-based waiver under the Dhanasar framework.”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

• recommendation letter · discounted

  “they show no awareness of the Petitioner's plans to pursue research rather than medical practice”

  AAO decision text
• resume experience · discounted

  “do not indicate that the Petitioner has any prior experience in medical research”

  AAO decision text
• degree · credited
• other · discounted

  “a petitioner may not make material changes to a petition that has already been filed”

  AAO decision text

Where this case turned

• Letters not independent · p2 — letters come from employers and close collaborators, not independent experts
• Material change of endeavor · p2 — the endeavor described on appeal is not the one filed
• No progress evidence · p2 — no documented movement toward the endeavor since filing
• Record of success insufficient · p2 — a claimed track record the documents do not establish
• Occupational shortage argument rejected · p3 — argues a labor shortage — the labor-certification question, not Dhanasar

Notable

The Petitioner materially changed his proposed endeavor mid-proceeding, from 'medical scientist/researcher' to practicing clinical medicine, which the AAO treated as an impermissible material change under Matter of Izummi rather than a mere clarification. The AAO also included an extended footnote (despite reserving prong 3) criticizing the Petitioner's attempt to use physician-shortage arguments to obtain a Dhanasar-based waiver instead of pursuing the statutory physician shortage waiver process under 8 C.F.R. 204.12.

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)(1)
• Matter of Izummi
• Matter of L-A-C-
• Poursina v. USCIS

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