Healthcare & Clinical Practice — what the record shows
34 coded decisions · read for the reasons cases fail, not to score you
How cases like this are judged
Of the 10 decisions in this profile that reached the merits, here is where each Dhanasar prong was found not established. 24 more never reached the merits and are not counted below.
Prong 1 — national importancenot established in 10 of 10 (100%)
9 of those were the deciding prong.
Prong 2 — well positionednot established in 1 of 1 (100%)
1 of those were the deciding prong.
Prong 3 — balance of factorsrarely reached at the merits here
Where cases like this most often fail
What this profile cannot afford to skip
- ✓The proposed endeavor must be specific, and it must stay the same endeavor: material changes after filing are not considered. Define it before you file, not on appeal.
- ✓The relevant question is not the importance of the industry or profession in which the individual will work. The endeavor itself must have substantial merit and national importance, distinct from the field's general value.
- ✓Letters must name your specific endeavor and trace how your work shaped later work. Officers are trained that letters praising skills in general terms do not add value as evidence.
The appeal outcomes behind these numbers
Shareable finding
Healthcare & Clinical Practice: "endeavor too vague" cited in 9 of 34 coded decisions
34 coded decisions, 2016-2026 · endeavor too vague in 9
Adjacent profiles
34coded decisions sit under this profile. A placement shows where yours would sit among them, not what it predicts.See where your profile sits — 90 seconds →
Statistics from the coded record (2016–2026). Methodology