Amphibious operations have been around since the Greeks and Romans. Every nation that projects military power over a major body of water (ie larger than a river) uses amphibious operations. We have no written doctrine from any of the nations that used such until the British developed Combined Operations during the Napoleonic Wars. But with or without a formal doctrine, such operations have been used effectively for at least 2,200 years.
The US in the CW used raids (one of the 5 types of amphibious operations) an untold number of times.
@leftyhunter listed above some of the well known major operations. I have long contended that the Lincoln administration failed to make effective use of the naval and army power they had to cut the eastern North Carolina railroads toward Richmond, but not because of the lack of doctrine or equipment -- just a lack of vision.
Remember that amphibious operations are conducted in pursuit of national objectives -- almost never for the sake of the Navy, but to meet higher requirements. For example, Gallipoli was assaulted to ensure the flow of supplies to Russia. Inchon was assaulted to cut the supply line of the North Korean army in the south. Fort Fisher was assaulted to cut off the overseas resupply of the Confederate war machine. The island hopping in the WW2 Pacific was to acquire bases to cover the advance to assault Japan itself. It all depends on the vision of the national government, executed by the armed forces. Limited vision yields limited results.