Business: healthcare revenue cycle management
The AAO dismissed the appeal because the petitioner offered only a generalized claim of error and did not contest the findings on the second and third Dhanasar prongs, so those issues were treated as waived.
Summarized by AI. Summaries on this site are written by AI and can contain errors. Always read the full decision on uscis.gov before relying on anything here. If a summary differs from the official decision, the official decision controls.
Summary
This NIW appeal involved an entrepreneur planning to run a medical billing and revenue cycle management business. SCOPS had accepted that he qualified for EB-2 through a bachelor's-equivalent degree plus five years of progressive experience, and found that he had established the endeavor's substantial merit but not its national importance, and had not met the second and third Dhanasar prongs. No brief arrived after the appeal was filed, and the short statement on the appeal form was treated as too general to identify the basis for contesting the denial. Because the petitioner did not address the second and third prongs at all, the AAO considered those arguments waived and dismissed the appeal.
Findings
| Criterion / prong | AAO finding | From the decision |
|---|---|---|
| Prong 1: Substantial merit and national importance | Not reached | the specific aspects he considers to be incorrect, the affected party has failed to identify the basis for |
| Prong 2: Well positioned to advance the endeavor | Not met | requirement would benefit the United States, he has waived these arguments and has thereby not |
| Prong 3: Balance favors waiving the job offer | Not met | requirement would benefit the United States, he has waived these arguments and has thereby not |
Why the AAO decided this way
- The petitioner indicated a brief would follow, but the AAO had not received a brief or additional evidence, leaving only the short statement on the appeal form.
- The AAO concluded that the statement did not explain how the claimed complexity, quality-framework role, or patient transparency of the endeavor bore on national importance, and that such a generalized assertion of error does not identify a basis for appeal.
- Because the petitioner addressed only national importance and did not challenge the findings that he was not well positioned and that a waiver would not, on balance, benefit the United States, the AAO deemed those arguments waived.
- Since every Dhanasar prong must be established, the waived prongs were enough to defeat the waiver request.
Authorities cited
- Matter of Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369 (AAO 2010)
- Matter of Christo's, Inc., 26 I&N Dec. 537 (AAO 2015)
- Matter of Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. 884 (AAO 2016)
- Flores v. Garland, 72 F.4th 85 (5th Cir. 2023)
- Matter of Pongatchev, 28 I&N Dec. 719 (BIA 2023)
- Matter of O-R-E-, 28 I&N Dec. 330 (BIA 2021)
- Matter of R-A-M-, 25 I&N Dec. 657 (BIA 2012)
- Darling Ingredients, Inc. v. Occupational Safety & Health Rev. Comm'n, 84 F.4th 253 (5th Cir. 2023)
Read the full decision on uscis.gov ↗
Please describe the error only. Do not send personal or case information. Anything you send will not be treated as confidential, and an error report does not create an attorney-client relationship.
Report an error in this summary