physical therapy
EB-2 National Interest Waiver — Merits Decision
Underlying petition: DENIED · Texas Service Center
Legal elements discussed — Matter of Dhanasar
Prong 1 — Substantial Merit & National Importance
FAILPetitioner argued: her proposed endeavor will have a significant economic impact because she will enhance the quality of services offered in physical therapy, a 34-billion-dollar industry
Evidence type: letter from J-A-
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) finding: INSUFFICIENT
“J-A- also did not discuss, and the Petitioner did not submit evidence of, any financial plan or forecast of the Petitioner's proposed endeavor indicating that her work would have other substantial economic effects on a level of national importance as contemplated in Dhanasar.”
Decision PDF, p. 3Open source PDF
Petitioner argued: her proposed endeavor has national importance because it aligns with the current trend of return-to-work programs in American companies and the broader goal of fostering a healthier workforce and reducing the economic burden associated with chronic illnesses and injuries
Evidence type: assertions
USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT
“the Petitioner does not submit evidence of how her work would impact public health beyond her treatment of individual patients on a level commensurate with national importance.”
Decision PDF, p. 3Open source PDF
Petitioner argued: her contributions extend beyond routine physical therapy, encompassing specialized techniques such as Dry Needling, Thermography, and participation in the study group of the McKenzie Method in Brazil
Evidence type: letters from colleagues
USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT
“The record does not indicate, however, that she created or significantly innovated any of these techniques or has made other contributions with national or even global implications in the field of physical therapy.”
Decision PDF, p. 2Open source PDF
Prong 2 — Well Positioned to Advance the Endeavor
NOT_DISCUSSEDProng 3 — Balancing the Waiver's Benefits
NOT_DISCUSSEDWhat this decision can’t tell you
This decision comes from a case that was denied and then appealed. Every case here is in that position — it cannot be used to estimate an overall approval rate, and it cannot predict the outcome of any individual case, including yours. USCIS officers exercise discretion on facts that are never fully captured in a written decision.
This decision turned on national importance. Describe your own work and see which decisions discussed the same issue.
Describe your situation →Related decisions
Questions this raises for your lawyer
- On Prong 1 (substantial merit & national importance), USCIS found the petitioner's letter from J-A- insufficient to establish that her proposed endeavor will have a significant economic impact because she will enhance the quality of services offered in physical therapy, a 34-billion-dollar industry. What would make comparable evidence in my own case more persuasive?
- What in my own case most resembles the specific facts USCIS focused on in this decision?
- Would additional expert-opinion evidence have changed the outcome here, based on what USCIS said was missing?