This appeal was not successful at this stage
The AAO dismissed the appeal because the petitioner failed to establish the national importance of her proposed endeavor under the first prong of the Dhanasar framework. Her work as a special education teacher was found to have impact limited to her immediate students rather than broader national implications.
The petitioner, a special education teacher working with students with disabilities, sought an EB-2 national interest waiver. While the Director and AAO both agreed she qualified as an advanced degree professional, her petition was denied because she failed to show that her specific teaching work had national importance under the Dhanasar framework's first prong. Expert letters and general statistics about the special education field were insufficient to demonstrate that her individual teaching activities would have broader implications beyond her classroom. The AAO declined to reach the second and third Dhanasar prongs because failure on the first was dispositive.
What worked: The petitioner successfully established her EB-2 advanced degree qualification. Evidence of the general importance and societal value of special education was accepted as demonstrating substantial merit of the field.
What failed: Expert opinion letters addressed the national importance of special education as a field rather than the petitioner's specific proposed endeavor, which is the correct legal focus. The petitioner could not show her teaching would impact the broader field or reduce teacher shortages nationally, and claims about expanding her work were unsupported by evidence. Labor shortages alone do not satisfy the national importance requirement because they are addressed through the labor certification process.
Takeaway: NIW petitioners in teaching or service occupations must go beyond showing that their profession is nationally important — they must provide concrete evidence that their specific work will have broader implications beyond their immediate workplace, such as through research, policy influence, scalable programs, or quantifiable national economic or social impact. Relying on field-wide statistics and shortage data, without tying them to the petitioner's unique contribution, is insufficient.
Cases like this are frequently used by attorneys when responding to RFEs or building initial petitions. The evidence patterns that worked (or failed) here directly reflect what USCIS officers look for when evaluating EB-2-NIW criteria.
● Evidence that moved the needle
- The petitioner successfully established her EB-2 advanced degree qualification
- Evidence of the general importance and societal value of special education was accepted as demonstrating substantial merit of the field.
● Evidence that wasn't enough alone
- Expert opinion letters addressed the national importance of special education as a field rather than the petitioner's specific proposed endeavor, which is the correct legal focus
- The petitioner could not show her teaching would impact the broader field or reduce teacher shortages nationally, and claims about expanding her work were unsupported by evidence
- Labor shortages alone do not satisfy the national importance requirement because they are addressed through the labor certification process.
Petitioner's advanced degree qualifying her as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree
Documentation of national shortage of special education teachers (accepted as showing substantial merit but not national importance)
Evidence of broader societal value of special education (accepted for substantial merit prong only)
Expert opinion letters from Dr. N-S-A-, Dr. T-G-Z-, and Dr. J-D- — found to address national importance of the field or profession rather than the petitioner's specific proposed endeavor
Letters of support from colleagues and supervisors — found relevant only to the second Dhanasar prong (well-positioned), not national importance
Claim that her work could expand to other states, churches, and schools — unsupported by corroborating evidence
Argument that teacher shortages establish national importance — rejected because petitioner did not show her endeavor would impact or reduce the shortage, and labor shortages are addressed through the labor certification process
General statistics and articles about special education in the United States — insufficient to show the petitioner's specific work has national importance beyond her immediate students
Completed
I-140 filed
Special education teacher working with students with disabilities, including developing individualized education programs (IEPs) and coordinating with parents, therapists, and administrators
Completed
Director — Denied
Initial decision: Denied.
Completed
Appeal to the AAO
Petitioner appealed to the Administrative Appeals Office for de novo review.
2023-10-02
AAO decision — Dismissed
The AAO dismissed the appeal because the petitioner failed to establish the national importance of her proposed endeavor under the first prong of the Dhanasar framework. Her work as a special education teacher was found to have impact limited to her immediate students rather than broader national implications.
If you're appealing a similar decision, I-290B must be filed within 30 days of personal service of the denial, or 33 days if mailed.
Find this useful? A coffee helps keep Case Reviewer free and ad-free.
Buy me a coffee