dismissedOCT102025_02B52032025-10-10 · appeal
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 sought to found and lead a new medical consulting and training business in the United States, serving as its CEO and medical science liaison, providing scientific/technical training and consulting to healthcare professionals on adopting advanced medical technologies.
Field: medical consulting / healthcare technology · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — not met
AAO disagreed with SCOPS's favorable threshold finding, concluding the record did not show the petitioner's Brazilian 'titulo de Fisioterapeuta' (earned after only two years of coursework) is a foreign equivalent of a U.S. bachelor's degree under AACRAO/EDGE standards, nor that she had five years of qualifying progressive post-baccalaureate experience.
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“the Petitioner has not sufficiently detailed her specific proposed endeavor or provided evidence demonstrating its potential prospective impact is commensurate with national importance”
“the growth and importance of an industry are not sufficient to meet the national importance requirement under the Dhanasar framework”
“the record does not sufficiently detail the basis for its financial and staffing projections, or adequately explain how these projections will be realized”
“the Petitioner's intent to transfer her professional knowledge to others through trainings and workshops does not demonstrate an impact on the healthcare industry more broadly”
AAO decision text
Prong 2 — well positionednot established · dispositive
“the letters do not provide specific details showing her record of success in the field”
“the opinion does not indicate the author has first-hand knowledge of the Petitioner's achievements, does not provide specific examples of how the Petitioner is well-positioned, and is not sufficiently supported by independent evidence”
“the record does not include evidence documenting feasible plans, such as financial support or investments, or correspondence from prospective or potential customers, or relevant entities”
“Without sufficient evidence demonstrating the means or financial support to undertake her proposed medical consulting and training business in the United States, the Petitioner has not demonstrated that her plan for future activities renders her well-positioned”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- business plan · discounted
“Mainly using general terms, the business plan broadly claims the business has the potential to impact”
AAO decision text - recommendation letter · discounted
“the letters do not provide specific details showing her record of success in the field”
AAO decision text - degree · discounted
“the record is not sufficiently clear to establish that the Petitioner possesses any U.S. academic or professional degree or a foreign equivalent degree above that of a bachelor's degree”
AAO decision text - resume experience · discounted
“she has not shown that her academic accomplishments are sufficient to demonstrate that she is well-positioned to advance her proposed endeavor”
AAO decision text - certification membership · discounted
“the record is not clear as to the extent her media appearances represent a record of success in her field”
AAO decision text
All 6 evidence items
- media · discounted
“she did not submit independent evidence explaining her role as an exhibitor to understand whether it sufficiently relates to her proposed endeavor”
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
- Occupational shortage argument rejected · p1 — argues a labor shortage — the labor-certification question, not Dhanasar
- Business plan speculative · p2 — projections without a documented basis or steps
- Funding absent · p2 — no documented funding or resources behind the plan
- Letters conclusory · p2 — letters praise skills in general terms without tracing specific impact
- Letters not independent · p2 — letters come from employers and close collaborators, not independent experts
- Record of success insufficient · p2 — a claimed track record the documents do not establish
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
AAO overturned SCOPS's favorable threshold finding sua sponte (finding the foreign credential and experience insufficient for advanced-degree classification) yet did not make that dispositive, instead resolving the appeal on Dhanasar prongs one and two; the petitioner's alternative exceptional-ability claim was reserved as unnecessary to the outcome.
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
- 8 C.F.R. 103.5
- Flores v. Garland
- Kazarian v. USCIS
- Matter of Caron Int'l
- Matter of D-R-
- Matter of E-M-
- Matter of L-A-C-
- Visinscaia v. Beers
Cases in adjacent profiles
- The Beneficiary proposed to establish an asset investment management and compliance advisory firm in New York offering c
- The Petitioner proposed to develop and commercialize zeolite-based products in the United States, including agricultural
- The Petitioner proposed to operate a medical billing and healthcare revenue cycle management firm in the United States,
- The Petitioner proposed to establish and lead as CEO a cybersecurity and crisis management company in Florida, offering
- The Petitioner proposed to establish and operate an IT consultancy company in Michigan providing cloud migration, cybers