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 Brazilian-trained physiotherapist, sought EB-2 classification as an advanced degree professional with a national interest waiver based on her physiotherapy work experience, but the specific proposed U.S. endeavor was not reached in the decision.
Field: physiotherapy · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — not met
The Petitioner failed to establish she possessed a foreign equivalent of a U.S. baccalaureate degree, as the diploma and its translations did not reference an academic degree level and the credential evaluation relied on an inapplicable 'three-for-one' rule and unverified self-reported experience. She also failed to establish five years of progressive post-baccalaureate experience, as her claimed employment history was internally inconsistent and materially conflicted with statements she made under penalty of perjury in prior DOS nonimmigrant visa applications (2008 and 2013). The AAO further found this conflicting evidence constituted willful misrepresentation of a material fact, and because the Petitioner failed to respond to a NOID, these discrepancies remained unresolved.
How the evidence was treated
- degree · discounted
“neither the original document nor its two certified English translations include any references to the level of academic degree”
AAO decision text - resume experience · discounted
“these inconsistencies undermine the reliability of the information in the letters”
AAO decision text - recommendation letter · discounted
“the three employment verification letters confirming her employment at the clinic ... are not consistent with her own statements and with each other”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“the evaluator's statements were unreliable, and we could not afford them significant weight”
AAO decision text
This record is one of thousands, each coded for the reasons it turned. A placement shows where your profile sits in that record, not what it predicts. See where your profile sits — 90 seconds →
Notable
The AAO did not reach the Dhanasar national-interest-waiver prongs because it found the Petitioner ineligible for the underlying EB-2 classification at the threshold stage. Following a NOID citing inconsistencies between the petition and prior DOS nonimmigrant visa records (in which the Petitioner claimed unrelated occupations such as gas station owner and construction company owner during the same period she claimed full-time physiotherapy employment), the AAO entered an affirmative finding of willful misrepresentation of a material fact, which may render the Petitioner inadmissible under section 212(a)(6)(C)(i) of the Act in future proceedings. The Petitioner did not respond to the NOID.
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)
- Flores v. Garland
- Matter of D-R-
- Matter of Ho
- 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