Rehabilitation therapy: art therapy
The AAO dismissed the appeal and left the petition denied because the evidence did not meet at least three of the ten criteria.
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
A hospital filed this EB-1A petition for a rehabilitation therapist and argued that she met four of the ten criteria, but the Nebraska Service Center found none of them satisfied. On appeal the AAO examined only awards and membership. It reasoned that a professional registration is not a prize and that student-level prizes and scholarships were not shown to be recognized beyond a school or locality, and that the honor societies were open to students in any field and based on grade point average. The two remaining criteria could at most bring the total to two, so the AAO reserved them and dismissed the appeal.
Findings
| Criterion / prong | AAO finding | From the decision |
|---|---|---|
| (i) Lesser nationally or internationally recognized awards | Not met | The Petitioner has not established eligibility under this criterion. |
| (ii) Membership requiring outstanding achievement | Not met | Therefore, the Petitioner has not provided |
| (v) Original contributions of major significance | Not reached | We therefore need not reach these issues, and will |
| (viii) Leading or critical role | Not reached | We therefore need not reach these issues, and will |
Why the AAO decided this way
- A hospital petitioned for a rehabilitation therapist and claimed four criteria; the Director found none satisfied.
- On the awards criterion, a professional registration is a credential and not a prize, and a school certificate and scholarship open only to students or to a local group of schools were not shown to be nationally or internationally recognized in the beneficiary's field.
- On the membership criterion, the academic honor societies were open to students in any field, and the record does not show who decides eligibility or that membership requires outstanding achievements judged by recognized experts in her field.
- The AAO reserved the original contributions and leading or critical role criteria because even if both were met, they would total only two, short of the required three.
- Without the required initial evidence, no final merits determination was made.
Authorities cited
- Matter of Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369 (AAO 2010)
- Matter of Christo's, Inc., 26 I&N Dec. 537 (AAO 2015)
- Kazarian v. USCIS, 596 F.3d 1115 (9th Cir. 2010)
- Visinscaia v. Beers, 4 F. Supp. 3d 126 (D.D.C. 2013)
- Rijal v. USCIS, 772 F. Supp. 2d 1339 (W.D. Wash. 2011)
- INS v. Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. 24 (1976)
- Matter of L-A-C-, 26 I&N Dec. 516 (BIA 2015)
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