NIW Bearings
dismissedMAR122024_03B52032024-03-12 · appeal · Texas Service Center

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 experienced nurse specializing in neonatology and pediatrics, sought to continue providing specialized nursing services in the United States.

Field: nursing (neonatology and pediatrics) · Read the decision (uscis.gov)

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

the Petitioner has not established that her endeavor will have an impact that extends beyond her future patients, co-workers, and employer(s) to the broader field of nursing or healthcare
a nursing shortage in the United States does not render her proposed endeavor nationally important under the Dhanasar framework
she does not provide evidence regarding the projected U.S. economic impact or job creation directly attributable to her future work
she does not substantiate how her specific endeavor would reduce the physician shortage at a level commensurate with national importance

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

  • resume experience · discounted
    the Petitioner's expertise and record of success in previous positions are considerations under Dhanasar's second prong
    AAO decision text

Where this case turned

  • Economic claims unsupported · p1job/revenue projections with no corroborating basis
  • Field importance conflated with endeavor · p1argues the field matters, not the specific endeavor
  • Local, not national scope · p1impact confined to clients / a region
  • Occupational shortage argument rejected · p1argues a labor shortage — the labor-certification question, not Dhanasar
2,501coded decisions carry the failure named in this record. A placement shows where your profile sits among them, not what it predicts.See where your profile sits — 90 seconds

Notable

AAO noted a factual dispute: Petitioner claimed the RFE stated she was found eligible for the classification, but AAO stated it found no such statement in the RFE; underlying EB-2 classification eligibility was reserved and not decided.

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
  • Flores v. Garland

Cases in adjacent profiles