The Petitioner, an aspiring military chaplain, proposed to implement suicide-prevention trainings and workshops for U.S. service members, address a shortage of female military chaplains, and counter domestic extremism and religious radicalism within the military.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“the Petitioner's endeavor has a narrow focus that ultimately influences only those that avail themselves of her work.”

“it does not demonstrate any impact or implications of the workshops and training programs beyond the individuals availing themselves ofthe service.”

“The Petitioner new facts and evidence do not demonstrate how the addition of one female military chaplain will address the shortage she describes in a way that is nationally important”

“the authors do not discuss the national, or even global, impact of the Petitioner's proposed endeavor or any broader implications”

“the degree certificate does not sufficiently demonstrate on its face that a degree in military science is sufficiently connected to an endeavor of military chaplaincy.”

“which we described as "not clear" in our previous decision”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

• recommendation letter · discounted

  “the content of the letters themselves speak about the Petitioner's attributes and not the attributes of the proposed endeavor”

  AAO decision text
• degree · discounted

  “The record does not contain sufficient evidence to demonstrate the Petitioner's master's degree in military leadership ... is the single source equivalent of a U.S. degree in military science”

  AAO decision text
• motion resubmission · discounted

  “The new facts supported by evidence the Petitioner submitted with her motion do not support a change in the outcome of this matter”

  AAO decision text
• other · discounted

  “The new facts the Petitioner identifies described in the court's dicta in Katcoff do not delve into whether the potential prospective impact of military chaplaincy had national importance”

  AAO decision text

Where this case turned

• degree endeavor mismatch · p1 — the advanced degree is in a different field from the endeavor
• Endeavor too vague · p1 — described as a job role, not a defined undertaking
• Letters conclusory · p1 — letters praise skills in general terms without tracing specific impact
• Local, not national scope · p1 — impact confined to clients / a region
• Occupational shortage argument rejected · p1 — argues a labor shortage — the labor-certification question, not Dhanasar

Notable

The Petitioner argued she could not provide the specificity typical of other NIW petitioners due to the confidential/hierarchical nature of military service, which the AAO called a 'confusing duality' undermining her own claims of a well-defined endeavor. The AAO also noted the Petitioner's motion asserted a different, STEM-qualifying degree (military science) than the one the AAO had previously found (political science, non-STEM), but found the record did not support the claimed degree equivalency or its connection to the endeavor.

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)(2)
• 8 C.F.R. 103.5(a)(3)
• 8 C.F.R. 103.5(a)(4)
• Matter of Coelho

Cases in adjacent profiles

• The Petitioner, an aircraft mechanic and instructor, proposed to enhance aviation maintenance training programs, support
• The Petitioner seeks EB-2 classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree with a national inter
• The petitioner sought an EB-2 national interest waiver of the job offer requirement, but the substance of the proposed e
• The Beneficiary, sponsored by a private airline, sought EB-2 classification as an individual of exceptional ability in a
• The petitioner sought an EB-2 national interest waiver as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree; the sp