A foreign-trained physician and surgeon sought to obtain U.S. licensure/board certification, undertake a surgical research fellowship, practice as a hospital surgeon, and hold a faculty position, while also conducting unspecified medical research.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“A vaguely-stated intention to conduct medical research, to which the Petitioner later added detailed plans regarding clinical practice ... does not suffice to establish that her proposed endeavor has national importance.”

“A surgeon's direct impact is largely limited to the small number of patients she treats.”

“The Petitioner asserts that there is a shortage of physicians and medical researchers in the United States ... This argument is not persuasive.”

“The collective importance of a given profession is not grounds for a national interest waiver; Congress could have created blanket waivers for particular occupations, but did not do so.”

“The vague ambition to "develop ... new medical breakthroughs" does not satisfy this prong of the Dhanasar test.”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

• recommendation letter · discounted

  “all emphasizing her clinical work as a physician and surgeon rather than expertise or significant experience as a researcher”

  AAO decision text
• citations publications · discounted

  “mostly while she was a student, and many of these projects appear to be case studies”

  AAO decision text
• resume experience · discounted

  “The Petitioner claims no prior experience conducting medical research (as opposed to practicing clinical medicine).”

  AAO decision text
• degree · discounted

  “the Petitioner claims no such plans in her own statement and the record does not otherwise refer to what the evaluator deems the primary reason”

  AAO decision text
• other · ignored

  “The submitted excerpt is in Portuguese with no English translation, so we can make no conclusions about its contents.”

  AAO decision text

Where this case turned

• 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
• Occupational shortage argument rejected · p1 — argues a labor shortage — the labor-certification question, not Dhanasar

Notable

The AAO noted the Petitioner materially shifted her stated endeavor between initial filing and RFE response (from research-focused to clinical-practice-focused), which undermined her national importance claim; the decision also distinguishes the Dhanasar NIW framework from the separate physician-shortage waiver under 8 C.F.R. 204.12, declining to address the shortage argument under that alternate regulatory scheme.

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.

• 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