dismissedMAR142024_04B52032024-03-14 · 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, a physical therapist, proposed to operate and manage a clinic in Florida providing physiotherapy, Pilates and Neo Pilates courses, including respiratory and neurological physiotherapy for COVID-19 patients.
Field: physical therapy / entrepreneurship · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“the evidence does not sufficiently demonstrate that the Petitioner's specific undertaking stands to have an impact beyond the organization and clients she would serve”
“the record does not establish the Petitioner has plans to introduce novel methodologies or medical advancements that may be disseminated to or adopted by others operating in the field or industry”
“the business plan makes various financial projections but has not offered evidence to corroborate the contents”
“the Petitioner does not elaborate on the 106 indirect jobs a RIMS II calculation anticipates her company will create”
“the Petitioner must establish the national importance of her business rather than the importance of physical therapy, small businesses, and entrepreneurism”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- business plan · discounted
“the business plan makes various financial projections but has not offered evidence to corroborate the contents”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“Without more detailed, credible evidence of the types of jobs that would be created and where the jobs would be located”
AAO decision text
Where this case turned
- Business plan speculative · p1 — projections without a documented basis or steps
- Economic claims unsupported · p1 — job/revenue projections with no corroborating basis
- Endeavor too vague · p1 — described as a job role, not a defined undertaking
- Field importance conflated with endeavor · p1 — argues the field matters, not the specific endeavor
- Local, not national scope · p1 — impact confined to clients / a region
1,358coded 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
The RIMS II (Regional Input-Output Modeling System) economic modeling evidence submitted on appeal projecting 106 indirect jobs was rejected as too unspecified regarding job types and location.
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
- INA 203(b)(2)
- Matter of L-A-C-
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