The Petitioner, a Brazilian-trained physical therapist and doula, proposed to work in the U.S. treating postpartum patients and sharing rehabilitation techniques, later also claiming she would found and lead a physiotherapy franchise company.

Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive

“The Petitioner did not provide details about the proposed endeavor beyond describing the duties of a physical therapist”

“The practice of physical therapy directly benefits a small number of individual patients, in a manner comparable to the proposed teaching activity of the petitioner in Dhanasar.”

“In fact, such shortages of qualified workers are directly addressed by the U.S. Department of Labor [DOL] through the labor certification process.”

“The business plan amounts not to a revision of her proposed endeavor, but to what appears to be a fundamentally new claim.”

AAO decision text

How the evidence was treated

• recommendation letter · discounted

  “it is unclear how such knowledge brings national importance to her proposed endeavor”

  AAO decision text
• business plan · discounted

  “has negligible evidentiary weight with respect to the proposed endeavor at the time of filing”

  AAO decision text
• other · discounted

  “the Petitioner did not explain how her work as a physical therapist would have an impact on the opioid crisis that would rise to the level of national importance”

  AAO decision text
• degree · credited

Where this case turned

• Business plan speculative · p1 — projections without a documented basis or steps
• Endeavor too vague · p1 — described as a job role, not a defined undertaking
• 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

AAO gave negligible weight to a business plan for a new company submitted nearly two years post-filing, treating it as an impermissible material change under Matter of Izummi rather than a mere update; also distinguished Schedule A Group I precertification (for physical therapist shortages) from the NIW process, holding that occupational shortages are addressed through labor certification, not the national interest waiver.

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. 103.2(b)(1)
• Matter of Izummi
• Matter of L-A-C-
• Poursina v. USCIS

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