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 certified nursing assistant and medical interpreter, proposed to own and operate an online business providing healthcare-related courses teaching medical terminology.
Field: healthcare education / online medical terminology courses · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — not met
In the prior appellate decision, the AAO withdrew the Director's finding that the Petitioner qualified as an advanced-degree professional and found she had not established EB-2 eligibility; this motion decision reaffirms that outcome without new substantive analysis.
Prong 2 — well positionednot established · dispositive
“We explained how the Petitioner had not demonstrated that she is well positioned to advance her proposed endeavor.”
“the Petitioner has not established new facts relevant to our appellate decision that would warrant reopening of the proceedings”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- business plan · discounted
“the Petitioner has not established new facts relevant to our appellate decision that would warrant reopening of the proceedings”
AAO decision text - motion resubmission · discounted
“Reasserting previously stated facts or resubmitting previously provided evidence does not constitute "new facts."”
AAO decision text - resume experience · discounted
“the Petitioner reiterates her experience as a certified nursing assistant and medical interpreter”
AAO decision text
Where this case turned
- Business plan speculative · p2 — projections without a documented basis or steps
- Record of success insufficient · p2 — a claimed track record the documents do not establish
Notable
This is a motion decision following a prior appellate dismissal; the AAO limited review to whether the motion satisfied reopening/reconsideration standards rather than re-analyzing the merits. The prior appellate decision had reserved prongs 1 and 3 and disposed of the case solely on prong 2, while also withdrawing the Director's favorable threshold EB-2 finding.
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)(i)
- 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)
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