Date of Decision: May 8, 2023
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-2 National Interest Waiver (NIW)
Field of Expertise: Physical Therapy
Petitioner Information
Profession: Physical Therapist
Field: Physical Therapy
Nationality: Not Specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Advanced Degree: The Petitioner qualifies as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree.
Criteria Not Met:
Substantial Merit and National Importance: The Petitioner did not sufficiently demonstrate that the proposed endeavor has national importance.
Well Positioned to Advance the Proposed Endeavor: The Petitioner did not establish broader implications of the national interest arising from their work.
On Balance, Beneficial to the United States: The Petitioner did not demonstrate how the benefit to the specific population would rise to a level of national importance.
Key Points from the Decision
Proposed Endeavor:
The Petitioner, a physical therapist, proposed to continue their career in the United States, focusing on helping children with special needs from low-income families in economically depressed areas. The Petitioner mentioned a nascent intention to have their degree validated to practice as a physical therapist in the U.S.
Substantial Merit and National Importance:
While the Director recognized the substantial merit of the Petitioner’s proposed endeavor, they found that it did not rise to the level of national importance. The Petitioner emphasized the shortage of physical therapists and the demand for their services but did not establish broader implications for the national interest. The advisory opinion submitted did not explain how the Petitioner’s work would alleviate a national shortage. The practice of physical therapy, even when aimed at children with special needs from low-income families, benefits only those individuals directly receiving the services, similar to how teaching benefits only the students being taught and not the wider population.
Supporting Evidence:
The Petitioner submitted various documents, including an expert opinion letter from an associate professor of health and sport sciences, employment records, and references to the Schedule A pre-certification for physical therapists. However, the evidence did not demonstrate how the Petitioner’s work would have a broader impact beyond the individuals directly receiving the services. The documentation did not establish how the localized benefits of the Petitioner’s work would rise to a level of national importance.
Inconsistencies in Proposed Endeavor:
The record did not demonstrate how the Petitioner’s proposed endeavor addresses and solves the national shortage of physical therapists. The advisory opinion did not illuminate the national importance of the Petitioner’s proposed endeavor. The broader implications of the proposed endeavor for the national interest were not sufficiently established.
Supporting Documentation
Letters of Intent:
None specified.
Business Plan:
Not applicable.
Advisory Letter:
Advisory letters described the Petitioner’s expertise but did not establish the national importance of the proposed endeavor.
Any Other Supporting Documentation:
The Petitioner provided additional documentation, including information from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, but these did not resolve the inconsistencies or establish the required level of national importance.
Conclusion
The appeal was dismissed because the Petitioner did not establish that the proposed endeavor has national importance, as required by the first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework. Consequently, the Petitioner did not qualify for a national interest waiver.
