remanded EB-3 Case: Physical Therapy

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: MAY 3, 2024 In Re: 30240490 
Appeal of Nebraska Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (Professional) 
The Petitioner - a provider of physical, occupational, and speech therapy services - seeks to 
permanently employ the Beneficiary as a physical therapist. The company requests his classification 
under the employment-based, third-preference (EB-3) immigrant visa category as a "professional." 
See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 203(b)(3)(A)(ii), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(3)(A)(ii). 
U.S. businesses may sponsor noncitizens in this category to work in the United States in jobs requiring 
at least bachelor's degrees. Id. 
The Director of the Nebraska Service Center denied the petition. The Director concluded that the 
Beneficiary needed to have a master's degree in physical therapy or its equivalent at the time of his 
U.S. licensure in the field and that the Petitioner did not demonstrate his possession of such credentials. 
On appeal, the Petitioner contends that the Director overlooked evidence. 
The Petitioner bears the burden of demonstrating eligibility for the requested benefit by a 
preponderance of the evidence. Matter of Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369, 375-76 (AAO 2010). 
Exercising de novo appellate review, see Matter of Christo 's, Inc., 26 I&N Dec. 537, 537 n.2 (AAO 
2015), we conclude that the Director erred in requiring the Beneficiary to have a master's degree in 
physical therapy or its equivalent. But, because the company has not established his possession of a 
bachelor's degree in the field as required by the offered job and the requested immigrant visa category, 
we will withdraw the Director's decision and remand the matter for entry of a new decision consistent 
with the following analysis. 
I. LAW 
Immigration as a professional typically follows a three-step process. First, to permanently fill a 
position in the United States with a foreign worker, a prospective employer obtains certification from 
the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL). See section 212(a)(5)(A)(i) of the Act, 8 U .S.C. 
§ l l 82(a)(5)(A)(i). Second, if DOL approves a position for a foreign worker, an employer submits 
the certified labor application with an immigrant visa petition to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration 
Services (USCIS). Section 204(a)(l)(F) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § l 154(a)(l)(F) . Finally, ifUSCIS grants 
a petition, the noncitizen beneficiary applies abroad for an immigrant visa or, if eligible, adjustment 
of status in the United States. See section 245(a) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1255(a). 
DOL, however, has predetermined that the United States lacks sufficient "physical therapists" and that 
noncitizens' employment in these Schedule A jobs would not harm the wages or working conditions 
of U.S. employees in similar positions. 20 C.F.R. § 656.5. Thus, U.S. organizations seeking to employ 
noncitizen physical therapists need not file individual labor certification applications with DOL to test 
the U.S. labor market for qualified workers. Rather, DOL has authorized USCIS to adjudicate 
Schedule A labor certification applications in petition proceedings. 20 C.F.R. § 656.15(a). Therefore, 
in this matter, USCTS rules not only on the immigrant visa petition, but also on its accompanying labor 
certification application. See 20 C.F.R. § 656.15( e) ( describing USCIS' determinations on Schedule 
A labor certification applications as "conclusive and final"). 
II. ANALYSIS 
A. Background Facts 
The record shows that the Beneficiary, an Indian native and citizen, earned a four-year bachelor's 
degree in physiotherapy in his home country in 2015. The following year, he came to the United 
States to study. In November 2017, the Beneficiary received a license to practice physical therapy in 
Indiana. In January 2018, an Indiana employer successfully petitioned to employ him as a physical 
therapist in H-IB nonimmigrant work visa status. See section I0l(a)(l5)(H) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 
§ 1101(a)(l5)(H). Later that year, he received a U.S. master of health science degree. In 2019, the 
Petitioner successfully filed an H-lB petition for him. He has worked for the company as a physical 
therapist at a client hospital in Indiana since January 2020. 
In May 2023, the Petitioner filed this immigrant visa petition for the Beneficiary. The Director denied 
the petition, finding that the company did not demonstrate the Beneficiary's qualifications for the 
offered occupation. The Director found that physical therapists like the Beneficiary who received 
physical therapy degrees between July 2009 and December 2017 require master's degrees in physical 
therapy to receive U.S. state licenses. Finding that the Petitioner did not demonstrate the Beneficiary's 
possession of a master's degree in physical therapy, the Director denied the petition. 
B. The Schedule A Labor Certification Application 
A Schedule A labor certification application must include: 
• an uncertified labor certification application form, see 20 C.F.R. § 656.15(a); 
• a permanent, full-time job offer in a Schedule A occupation, see 20 C.F.R. § 656.3 (defining 
the term "employment"); 
• a prevailing wage determination from DOL, see 20 C.F.R. § 656.15(b)(l) (referencing 
20 C.F.R. §§ 656.40, 656.41); and 
• a notice of the application's filing provided to a bargaining representative, if applicable, or to 
employees, see 20 C.F.R. § 656.15(b )(2) (referencing 20 C.F.R. § 656.10( d)). 
Also, a U.S. organization seeking to employ a noncitizen physical therapist must submit evidence 
establishing that the beneficiary has a permanent license to practice physical therapy in the state of 
intended employment. 20 C.F.R. § 656.15(c)(l); see generally 6 USCIS Policy Manual E.(7)(F)(l), 
www.uscis.gov/policy-manual. Alternatively, an employer may submit a statement from an 
2 
authorized physical therapy licensing official in the state of intended employment indicating a 
beneficiary's eligibility to take a written physical therapy licensing examination in the state. Id. 
The record supports the Petitioner's compliance with Schedule A labor certification requirements. 
The Petitioner submitted a labor certification application stating the company's offer to employ the 
Beneficiary as a physical therapist on a permanent, full-time basis. The application states the job's 
minimum requirements as a U.S. bachelor's degree or foreign equivalent degree in physical therapy 
and possession of, or eligibility for, an Indiana physical therapy license. 
The Petitioner also submitted a prevailing wage determination (PWD) indicating that it would employ 
the Beneficiary at a wage rate of $80,552 a year, exceeding the occupation's annual prevailing wage 
in the worksite's geographical area of $73,216. As required, the PWD's validity ranges from 90 days 
to one year, and the company filed the labor certification application during the wage determination's 
validity period. See 20 C.F.R. § 656.40( c ). 
The company further complied with filing notice requirements. It submitted a notice stating that the 
posting stems from a labor certification application and that anyone may provide evidence on the 
application to DOL. See 20 C.F.R. § 656.10(d)(3)(i), (ii). The notice also provides DOL's proper 
address in Washington, D.C. and indicates its posting at the worksite for at least 10 consecutive 
business days, between 30 and 180 days before the application's filing. See 20 C.F.R. 
§§ 656.l0(d)(l)(ii), (3)(iii), (iv). 
Also consistent with DOL regulations, the Petitioner documented the Beneficiary's licensure as a 
physical therapist in Indiana since November 2017. But, by requiring the Beneficiary to have a 
master's degree in physical therapy or its equivalent, the Director effectively questioned his license's 
validity. 
The Director explained that current U.S. physical therapy graduates must receive doctorate degrees in 
the field to obtain state licensure in the United States. The Director noted that U.S. physical therapists 
with only master's or bachelor's degrees in the field at the time of their licensing can still extend the 
validity of their licenses and practice physical therapy. See 6 USCJS Policy Manual E.(7)(G)(l) 
("[M]any states have 'grandfathering' clauses that allow those who obtained a bachelor's degree under 
the previous licensing requirements to continue working in the field"). But the Director found that 
state licensing rules at the time the Beneficiary received his license in 2017 required him to have a 
U.S. master's degree in physical therapy or its equivalent. The Director stated: 
Physical Therapists who graduated from July 1, 2009 through December 31, 2017 must 
have the foreign equivalent of a U.S. master's degree in physical therapy. Thus, at the 
time of filing, the beneficiary must have a U.S. Master's degree ( or foreign equivalent) 
or a U.S. Bachelor's degree (or foreign equivalent) and at least five years of progressive 
post-baccalaureate experience in the specialty. [See 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2) (defining 
the term "advanced degree" and equating a bachelor's degree followed by five years of 
progressive experience in a specialty to a master's degree in the field.] These 
requirements, for U.S. students of Physical Therapy, are set by the Commission on 
Accreditation of Physical Therapy Education (CAPTE), an arm of APTA (the 
American Physical Therapy Association). 
3 
The Petitioner documented the Beneficiary's receipt of his 2015 Indian bachelor of physiotherapy 
degree and his 2018 U.S. master of health science degree. But the Director found that the Beneficiary's 
master of health science degree does not lie in the required field of physical therapy. The Director 
also found that, because the Petitioner did not demonstrate the Beneficiary's possession of five years 
of progressive, post-baccalaureate experience in physical therapy, the company did not establish that 
he has the equivalent of a U.S. master's degree in physical therapy. See 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(1)(3)(ii)(A) 
(requiring a petitioner to document a beneficiary's qualifying experience for an offered job with letters 
from their current or fonner employers). 
The Director erred in requiring the Petitioner to demonstrate the Beneficiary's possession of a master's 
degree in physical therapy or its equivalent. Under DOL Schedule A regulations, the Beneficiary need 
only have a physical therapist license in the state of intended employment or eligibility to take the 
state's licensing examination. See 20 C.F.R. § 656.15(c)(l); see also 6 USCIS Policy Manual 
E.(7)(F)(l) . The Petitioner documented the Beneficiary's possession of an Indiana physical therapy 
license since November 2017. Also, in response to the Director's notice of intent to deny (NOID) the 
petition, the company submitted a July 2023 letter from an Indiana licensing official. The letter states: 
"As of November 2, 2017 [the date the Beneficiary received his physical therapy license], Indiana's 
minimum requirement to obtain the physical therapy license was a bachelor's degree for physical 
therapy." 
Further, at that time, assuming an applicant for a physical therapy license passed criminal and 
disciplinary checks and the required examination, Indiana law allowed the state's physical therapy 
committee to "license as a physical therapist ... any person who has graduated as a physical therapist 
... in a foreign country from an educational program approved by the committee." Ind. Code§ 25-
27-1-9 (2017). Thus, because the Petitioner met DOL requirements and the record shows his valid 
receipt of an Indiana physical therapist's license, the Director erred in requiring the company to 
demonstrate his possession of a master's degree in physical therapy or its equivalent. 
In support of her finding that applicants for physical therapy licenses who graduated between 2009 
and 201 7 must have master's degrees in the field, the Director referenced CAPTE and APT A. But the 
Director did not cite any specific publications from the organizations stating that requirement, nor 
were we able to find any. Thus, a preponderance of the evidence demonstrates the Beneficiary's 
possession of a valid Indiana physical therapy license at the time of the application's filing. The 
Petitioner's Schedule A labor certification application therefore complies with DOL regulations. 
C. The Petition Requirements 
While the Petitioner has met the Schedule A labor certification requirements, it must also comply with 
immigrant visa petition requirements under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5. For example, a petition for a professional 
must include "evidence that the [noncitizen] holds a United States baccalaureate degree or a foreign 
equivalent 
degree." 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(1)(3)(ii)(C). "Evidence of a baccalaureate degree shall be in the 
form of an official college or university record showing the date the baccalaureate degree was awarded 
and the area of concentration of study." Id. 
The plain language of the regulation indicates that a professional must have a single "degree" -
uncombined with other education or experience - that is either a U.S. baccalaureate in the required 
4 
field or a foreign degree equivalent. See Final Rules for Employment-Based Immigrants, 56 Fed. Reg. 
60897, 60900 (Nov. 29, 1991) ("[B]oth the Act and its legislative history make clear that, in order to 
qualify as a professional under the third classification ... , a [ noncitizen] must have at least a bachelor's 
degree.") 
The Petitioner submitted copies of official university records showing the Beneficiary's receipt of the 
Indian bachelor of physiotherapy degree in August 2015 and the U.S. master of health science degree 
in August 2018. The record, however, does not demonstrate that either degree equates on its own to 
at least a U.S. bachelor's degree in physical therapy or a foreign equivalent degree as stated on the 
labor certification application and as required for the requested immigrant visa classification. 
The Petitioner submitted three independent, professional evaluations of the Beneficiary's credentials. 
When considering expert opinions, USCIS may reject or give lesser evidentiary weight to testimony 
that conflicts with other information or "is in any way questionable." Matter of Caron Int 'l, Inc., 
19 I&N Dec. 791, 795 (Comm'r 1988). 
A 2019 report from the Foreign Credentialing Commission on Physical Therapy (FCCPT) concludes 
that the Beneficiary's university academic and clinical coursework, in India and the United States 
combined, equates to a U.S. doctor of physical therapy degree. 1 The evaluation, however, does not 
specify whether his baccalaureate or master's degree, on its own, equates to at least a U.S. bachelor's 
degree of physical therapy. 
A 2023 evaluation concludes that the Beneficiary has the equivalent of at least a U.S. master's degree 
in physical therapy. But, contrary to the requirements of the offered job and the requested immigrant 
visa category, the evaluation bases its conclusion not only on his university coursework, but also his 
employment experience as a physical therapist. The evaluation states that the Beneficiary's U.S. 
graduate curriculum "contains courses and practicum experiences that are strongly reflective of many 
of the courses you would find in a typical Master of Physical Therapy program." Neither the copies 
of the Beneficiary's master's diploma nor an accompanying transcript indicate that he majored in 
physical therapy. A university letter states that his master of health science degree had a 
"concentration" in physical therapy. But none of the materials state that the Beneficiary's master of 
health degree, alone, equates to a U.S. master of physical therapy degree. 
The 2023 evaluation also asserts that, by approving H-IB nonimmigrant visa petitions for the 
Beneficiary, USCIS has "verified" the equivalency of his Indian bachelor's degree to a U.S. 
baccalaureate in physical therapy. But petitioners for H-lB "professional workers" may demonstrate 
a U.S. baccalaureate equivalency based on training/experience alone or a combination of education 
and training/experience. See 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(h)(4)(iii)(D)(5) (for H-lB purposes, equating three 
years of training or work experience to one year of higher education in a relevant field). Thus, the 
evaluation does not demonstrate that the Beneficiary's Indian bachelor's degree, alone, equates to a 
U.S. bachelor's degree in physical therapy. 
1 The Department of Homeland Security has authorized FCCPT to issue required certificates to foreign healthcare workers 
in the field of physical therapy. Section 212(a)(5)(C) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(5)(C); 8 C.F.R. § 212.15(e)(3). 
FCCPT issued the Beneficiary a foreign healthcare worker certificate. The Beneficiary would require the certificate before 
becoming a U.S. permanent resident. But it is not required for this petition's approval. 
5 
The third evaluation finds the Beneficiary's Indian bachelor's degree equivalent to four years of 
university study in the United States. U.S. baccalaureate degrees usually require four years of college 
or university study. Matter ofShah, 17 I&N Dec. 244,245 (Reg'l Comm'r 1977). But the evaluation 
does not specify the equivalency of the Beneficiary's foreign degree to a U.S. baccalaureate. The 
evaluation finds that his Indian university coursework equates to 124.5 U.S. university credits. The 
FCCPT evaluation, however, indicates that four years of U.S. university study for a physical therapist 
typically requires 128 credits. Thus, the evaluations submitted by the Petitioner do not establish that 
either the Beneficiary's master or bachelor's degree equates to a U.S. bachelor's degree in physical 
therapy. 
The Director did not notify the Petitioner of this evidentiary deficiency. We will therefore remand the 
matter. On remand, the Director should inform the company of the need for additional evidence that 
one of the Beneficiary's degrees equates to at least a U.S. bachelor's degree in physical therapy. 
If supported by the record, the Director may notify the Petitioner of any other potential denial grounds. 
The Director, however, must give the company a reasonable opportunity to respond to all issues raised 
on remand. Upon receipt of a timely response, the Director should review the entire record and enter 
a new decision. 
III. CONCLUSION 
The Director erred by requiring the Petitioner to demonstrate the Beneficiary's receipt of a master's 
degree in physical therapy or its equivalent. But the company has not established his possession of 
the minimum education required for the offered job or the requested immigrant visa category. 
ORDER: The Director's decision is withdrawn. The matter is remanded for entry of a new 
decision consistent with the foregoing analysis. 
6