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, an internal medicine resident, proposed to conduct research on developing advanced devices for treating complex coronary artery disease using computational modeling, simulation, and multicenter clinical trials to optimize device design, improve patient outcomes, and reduce healthcare costs.
Field: interventional cardiology / cardiology research · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — addressed
SCOPS found and AAO agreed that the Petitioner qualifies as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree; threshold EB-2 was not at issue on appeal.
Prong 1 — national importanceestablished
“As the Petitioner has demonstrated both the substantial merit and national importance of his proposed research, he has established that he meets the first prong of the Dhanasar framework.”
“the record does not establish that his clinical work would impact the field of cardiology research or U.S. public health more broadly, as opposed to being limited to the patients he serves.”
AAO decision text
Prong 2 — well positionednot established · dispositive
“he did not elaborate on the extent to which the Petitioner's specific findings are being utilized to improve diagnostic approaches for cardiovascular diseases.”
“he does not offer specific examples of how the Petitioner's work has affected cardiovascular care, improved patient outcomes, or otherwise shows success or progress at a level that renders him well positioned”
“the Petitioner has not submitted sufficient evidence confirming that information extrapolated from the larger field applies equally to each subfield within clinical medicine, including cardiology.”
“citation frequency which is quantitative in nature does not reveal the reasons for the citations, which involve a qualitative analysis.”
“none highlight or comment upon his research in a way that demonstrates he is well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor.”
“the Petitioner's evidence does not identify the specific research projects for which he has received funding or demonstrate the significance of his role.”
“while his Medical Physician Diploma renders him eligible for the underlying EB-2 visa classification, he has not shown that his academic accomplishments by themselves are sufficient to demonstrate that he is well positioned”
“his time, approximately 25 - 30%, has been devoted to research.”
“The Petitioner, however, has not sufficiently demonstrated that his work constitutes a record of success or progress in cardiology research rendering him well positioned to advance his proposed endeavor.”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- recommendation letter · discounted
“he does not offer specific examples of how the Petitioner's work has affected cardiovascular care, improved patient outcomes, or otherwise shows success or progress”
AAO decision text - citations publications · discounted
“citation frequency which is quantitative in nature does not reveal the reasons for the citations, which involve a qualitative analysis.”
AAO decision text - citations publications · discounted
“the Petitioner has not submitted sufficient evidence confirming that information extrapolated from the larger field applies equally to each subfield within clinical medicine, including cardiology.”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“the record does not indicate that their methods have been accepted and implemented by the academic community.”
AAO decision text - funding · discounted
“the Petitioner's evidence does not identify the specific research projects for which he has received funding or demonstrate the significance of his role.”
AAO decision text
All 9 evidence items
- degree · discounted
“he has not shown that his academic accomplishments by themselves are sufficient to demonstrate that he is well positioned to advance his proposed endeavor.”
AAO decision text - resume experience · discounted
“his time, approximately 25 - 30%, has been devoted to research.”
AAO decision text - certification membership · discounted
“he has not demonstrated, however, that his participation in the widespread peer review process represents a record of success in his field”
AAO decision text - awards · discounted
“he has not shown that his ... nominations and presentations, and conference invitations rise to the level of rendering him well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor.”
AAO decision text
Where this case turned
- Citations insufficient · p2 — citation counts without qualitative account of impact
- Education alone insufficient · p2 — degrees offered as positioning — credentials are not a track record
- Funding absent · p2 — no documented funding or resources behind the plan
- Letters conclusory · p2 — letters praise skills in general terms without tracing specific impact
- 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
Notable
The AAO explicitly addressed and rejected the Petitioner's argument that his citation record was stronger than Dr. Dhanasar's, clarifying that the Dhanasar precedent decision's well-positioned finding was not based on citation record but on funded grant proposals and government entity interest (NASA, AFRL). The AAO also discounted the Petitioner's bibliometric methodology article (advising top-10% citation threshold) because it had not been accepted by the academic community, and noted the article itself cautioned against using Google Scholar for bibliometric analysis. Prong 1 was found met (research, not clinical duties); prong 3 was expressly reserved under Bagamasbad.
What this case teaches
Analyst reading of the decision text.
Petitioner failed prong two: letters, citations, funding, and peer review evidence showed expertise and some interest but not a record of success or concrete progress positioning him to advance the specific proposed research endeavor.
For prong two, submit evidence directly linking credentials/citations to concrete progress, funding tied to the specific endeavor, and qualitative proof of research uptake—not just citation counts or credentials.
moderate
field_advancement · public_health
person_focused
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