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 proposed to establish and operate a home healthcare business in Ohio providing nursing care services to seniors, while also training caregivers and other healthcare professionals.
Field: health services management / home healthcare · Read the decision (uscis.gov)
EB-2 threshold — addressed
SCOPS found the Petitioner qualifies for EB-2 based on a foreign equivalent bachelor's degree in nursing plus at least five years of experience in the specialty under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2). AAO did not disturb this finding.
Prong 1 — national importancenot established · dispositive
“The evidence does not establish that the Petitioner's specific proposed endeavor has the potential to impact the healthcare field or affect the economy at a level commensurate with national importance.”
“the relevant question is not the importance of the industry, field, or profession in which an individual will work; instead, to assess national importance, we focus on the 'specific endeavor that the foreign national proposes to undertake.'”
“SCOPS concluded that these projections were not sufficiently supported by evidence and further that even if they were sufficiently supported, that they do not establish that her company would operate on a scale rising to the level of national importance.”
“The Petitioner has not shown that her proposed endeavor stands to sufficiently extend beyond her patients or trainees to impact the healthcare industry or the U.S. economy at a level commensurate with national importance.”
“the opinion letter is of little probative value as it primarily repeats the Petitioner's claims about the importance of the field in general, rather than credibly describing the potential prospective impact.”
AAO decision text
How the evidence was treated
- business plan · discounted
“these projections were not sufficiently supported by evidence and further that even if they were sufficiently supported, that they do not establish that her company would operate on a scale rising to the level of national importance”
AAO decision text - recommendation letter · discounted
“the opinion letter is of little probative value as it primarily repeats the Petitioner's claims about the importance of the field in general, rather than credibly describing the potential prospective impact”
AAO decision text - other · discounted
“merely working in an important field is not sufficient to establish the national importance of the 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
- Employer-specific benefit · p1 — "work furthers my company's product" — value accrues to one firm
- 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
Notable
The AAO refused to consider new evidence submitted on appeal, citing Matter of Furtado and Matter of Soriano, because the Petitioner had been put on notice via RFE and given a reasonable opportunity to submit it. The AAO drew an explicit analogy to the Dhanasar petitioner's teaching activities not extending beyond his students, applying the same reasoning to the Petitioner's patients and trainees. The location of the proposed business in Ohio was redacted in the decision text.
What this case teaches
Analyst reading of the decision text.
The endeavor's benefits did not extend beyond her patients and trainees; unsupported financial and job projections and an expert letter that merely repeated the field's importance failed prong-1 national importance.
Show your endeavor's impact extends beyond your patients or trainees; unsupported revenue and job projections, and an expert letter that repeats the field's importance, do not establish national importance.
moderate
public_health · economic_job_creation · government_interest
mixed
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