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 trained in Brazil, sought to continue working as a physical therapist in the United States.
Field: physical therapy · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — not met
The Petitioner's diploma did not clearly establish a foreign bachelor's-equivalent degree, and her employer letters did not establish five years of progressive post-baccalaureate experience; the FCCPT evaluation raised further doubts about curricular equivalency. The AAO withdrew the Director's finding that the EB-2 threshold was met and remanded for the Director to resolve these evidentiary gaps.
Prong 1 — national importancenot established
“she has not offered sufficient information and evidence to demonstrate that the prospective impact of her proposed endeavor rises to the level of national importance”
“she has not demonstrated that her specific proposed endeavor has significant potential to employ U.S. workers or otherwise offer substantial positive economic effects for our nation”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- degree · discounted
“the document bears no indication that she was awarded a bachelor's degree from that institution”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“the basis for his conclusory statements regarding the qualifying nature of the Petitioner's education and work experience has not been substantiated”
AAO decision text - resume experience · discounted
“we are unable to conclude that the Petitioner has at least five years of progressive experience as required”
AAO decision text - recommendation letter · discounted
“the record does not establish that Dr. M- was the Petitioner's former employer”
AAO decision text
Where this case turned
- Economic claims unsupported · p1 — job/revenue projections with no corroborating basis
- Endeavor too vague · p1 — described as a job role, not a defined undertaking
Notable
The AAO withdrew the Director's favorable threshold EB-2 finding sua sponte, focusing on unresolved questions about whether the Petitioner's Brazilian physiotherapy diploma equates to a U.S. bachelor's degree and whether her experience letters satisfy the progressive-experience requirement, remanding for the Director to make a new threshold determination rather than dismissing the appeal outright, even though it separately agreed the national importance prong was unmet.
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. 204.5(k)(2)
- 8 C.F.R. 204.5(k)(3)(ii)
- INA 203(b)(2)
- Matter of Ho
- Poursina v. USCIS
What this case teaches
Analyst reading of the decision text.
Threshold EB-2 eligibility unresolved: unsubstantiated bachelor's degree equivalency and unverified employment letters required remand before reaching NIW merits; national importance also unmet.
Establish underlying EB-2 classification with objective, verifiable credential and employer evidence, and articulate the endeavor's broader field/national-scale impact, not just personal qualifications.
vague
economic_job_creation · public_health
person_focused
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