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 dentist by training, initially proposed to conduct medical research developing a lighter, cheaper substitute for PMMA dermal filler, but later described (in RFE response) a plan to manage a cosmetic-surgery training and sales academy.
Field: dentistry / dental and aesthetic surgery research · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — not met
AAO found the Petitioner did not establish U.S. equivalency of her foreign degree to an advanced degree and lacked evidence of progressive post-degree experience; remanded for Director to instead assess exceptional-ability eligibility.
Prong 1 — national importanceestablished
“the RFE response presented a new set of facts regarding the work she will perform, which is material to eligibility for a national interest waiver”
“The information the Petitioner provided in the response to the Director's RFE did not clarify or provide more specificity to an initially described proposed endeavor”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- degree · discounted
“we conclude that the Petitioner has not met her burden to establish the U.S. equivalency of her foreign education”
AAO decision text - resume experience · discounted
“the record lacks evidence of the Petitioner's progressive, post-degree experience as a dentist, dental surgeon or researcher”
AAO decision text - business plan · discounted
“the RFE response presented a new set of facts regarding the work she will perform, which is material to eligibility”
AAO decision text
Where this case turned
- Material change of endeavor · p1 — the endeavor described on appeal is not the one filed
Notable
AAO independently consulted the AACRAO EDGE database to assess foreign-degree equivalency, finding the Petitioner's credentials equated only to a U.S. bachelor's degree; it withdrew the Director's EB-2 classification finding and remanded for the Director to instead evaluate exceptional-ability eligibility and, if met, to analyze all three Dhanasar prongs solely with respect to the Petitioner's original research-based endeavor, treating the later business-management proposal as an impermissible material change under Matter of Izummi.
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. 103.3
- 8 C.F.R. 204.5(g)(1)
- 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(2)
- 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(3)(iii)
- Matter of Izummi
- Poursina v. USCIS
What this case teaches
Analyst reading of the decision text.
Petitioner impermissibly changed her proposed endeavor in the RFE response (from medical research to managing a training/sales academy), an improper material change; also failed to prove foreign degree equivalency for EB-2 classification.
Keep the proposed endeavor consistent from filing through RFE response—clarify, don't replace it—and independently substantiate foreign degree equivalency with formal evaluation evidence.
vague
field_advancement · public_health
mixed
Cases in adjacent profiles
- The Petitioner, a senior principal biostatistician, proposes to develop innovative statistical and machine-learning meth
- The Petitioner proposed to use advanced deep learning and machine learning models to create efficient, safe, and well-pe
- The Petitioner proposes to advance machine learning methods for the design and optimization of advanced metamaterials an
- The Petitioner, a postdoctoral chemist, proposed to continue developing high-performance materials and novel synthetic m
- The Petitioner proposes to design novel sensor data processing methods and machine learning algorithms for smart wearabl