EB-2 NIW Appeals: Medicine
Last updated 2026-09-02
The AAO dismissed 83.8% of EB-2 NIW appeals from Medicine petitioners in published non-precedent decisions from 2017–2025 (n=191). The criterion most often at issue was Prong 1: Substantial merit and national importance.
Outcomes by Year
| Year | Dismissed | Sustained | Remanded | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | 7 (—) | 0 | 0 | 7 |
| 2024 | 58 (93.5%) | 2 | 2 | 62 |
| 2023 | 38 (80.9%) | 2 | 7 | 47 |
| 2022 | 11 (—) | 1 | 2 | 14 |
| 2021 | 18 (75.0%) | 2 | 4 | 24 |
| 2020 | 3 (—) | 3 | 1 | 7 |
| 2019 | 6 (—) | 1 | 1 | 8 |
| 2018 | 10 (—) | 1 | 0 | 11 |
| 2017 | 9 (—) | 2 | 0 | 11 |
Criteria Breakdown
| Criterion | In Dismissed | In Sustained | Total | Dismissal Rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Prong 1: Substantial merit and national importance | 166 | 9 | 192 | 86.5% |
| Prong 2: Well positioned to advance the endeavor | 132 | 11 | 157 | 84.1% |
| Prong 3: On balance, waiver benefits the U.S. | 126 | 12 | 152 | 82.9% |
| Advanced degree | 29 | 3 | 43 | 67.4% |
| Exceptional ability | 23 | 0 | 31 | 74.2% |
| Motion to reopen/reconsider | 16 | 0 | 16 | — |
Example Decisions
Sustained2024-12-17The appeal was sustained because the AAO determined that the petitioner met all three prongs of the Dhanasar framework f
Sustained2021-01-19The appeal was sustained because the AAO determined that the petitioner, contrary to the director's finding, met the sec
Sustained2020-11-27The appeal was sustained because the petitioner provided sufficient evidence to overcome the director's basis for denial
Sustained2023-11-16The appeal was sustained because the AAO found that the petitioner had established the beneficiary's eligibility under t
Sustained2022-10-19The appeal was sustained because the AAO, upon de novo review, found the petitioner eligible for a national interest wai
Dismissed2021-04-15The Director initially denied the petition for failing to establish the proposed endeavor's national importance or that
Dismissed2025-02-24The appeal was dismissed because the petitioner failed to establish the 'national importance' of his proposed endeavor.
Dismissed2024-11-25The appeal was dismissed because the petitioner failed to demonstrate they were well-positioned to advance the proposed
Dismissed2024-10-07The appeal was dismissed because the petitioner failed to establish eligibility for the underlying EB-2 classification a
Dismissed2024-09-25The appeal was dismissed because the petitioner failed to establish the national importance prong of the Dhanasar framew
In sustained EB-2 NIW appeals for Medicine petitioners, the AAO credited evidence such as a track record showing the petitioner is positioned to advance the endeavor; evidence that the proposed endeavor has national importance. Dismissed cases most often lacked a clearly defined proposed endeavor with specificity beyond a general field of work; non-speculative evidence (claims were conclusory or unsupported); evidence that benefits extend beyond the petitioner's own work or employer.
NYSDOT-era decisions (pre-2017)
Outcomes by Year
| Year | Dismissed | Sustained | Remanded | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2016 | 12 (—) | 3 | 0 | 15 |
| 2015 | 14 (—) | 1 | 1 | 16 |
| 2014 | 35 (94.6%) | 2 | 0 | 37 |
| 2013 | 21 (87.5%) | 3 | 0 | 24 |
| 2012 | 28 (96.6%) | 1 | 0 | 29 |
| 2011 | 31 (100.0%) | 0 | 0 | 31 |
| 2010 | 6 (—) | 0 | 0 | 6 |
| 2009 | 9 (—) | 1 | 0 | 10 |
| 2008 | 1 (—) | 1 | 1 | 3 |
| 2007 | 2 (—) | 1 | 1 | 4 |
| 2006 | 3 (—) | 2 | 0 | 5 |
| 2005 | 14 (66.7%) | 5 | 2 | 21 |
| 2004 | 1 (—) | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| 2003 | 0 (—) | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| 2001 | 1 (—) | 1 | 1 | 3 |
Criteria Discussed
| Criterion | In Dismissed | In Sustained | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intrinsic merit (NYSDOT) | 133 | 18 | 153 |
| National in scope (NYSDOT) | 129 | 18 | 151 |
| Substantially greater degree than U.S. worker (NYSDOT) | 114 | 18 | 134 |
| Exceptional ability | 33 | 2 | 36 |
| Procedural/filing | 13 | 0 | 15 |
| Advanced degree | 10 | 1 | 13 |
| Prong 3: On balance, waiver benefits the U.S. | 9 | 2 | 11 |
| Motion to reopen/reconsider | 5 | 0 | 5 |
| Fraud/misrepresentation | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Prong 1: Substantial merit and national importance | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Prong 2: Well positioned to advance the endeavor | 0 | 1 | 1 |
Sample: published AAO non-precedent decisions collected from uscis.gov. EB-2 NIW statistics reflect the Dhanasar framework era (2017–2025); the prior NYSDOT framework applied different legal standards. These are appeals, not all USCIS adjudications; approval rates here are not initial-filing approval rates. Read our full methodology.
Get Your Free Strategy Preview →