dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Accounting

Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Date: MAY 30, 2024 In Re: 31125264 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, an accountant, seeks classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced 
degree. See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 203(b)(2), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(2). The 
Petitioner also seeks a national interest waiver of the job offer requirement that is attached to this EB-2 
immigrant classification. See section 203(b)(2)(B)(i) of the Act. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration 
Services (USCIS) may grant this discretionary waiver of the required job offer, and thus of a labor 
certification, when it is in the national interest to do so. 
The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the record did not 
establish that the Petitioner qualifies for the national interest waiver. The matter is now before us on 
appeal under 8 C.F.R. § 103.3. 
The Petitioner bears the burden of proof to demonstrate eligibility by a preponderance of the evidence. 
Matter of Chawathe, 25 l&N Dec. 369, 375-76 (AAO 2010). We review the questions in this matter 
de novo. Matter of Christo 's, Inc., 26 I&N Dec. 537, 537 n.2 (AAO 2015). Upon de novo review, 
we will dismiss the appeal. 
I. LAW 
To qualify for a 
national interest waiver, a petitioner must first show eligibility for the underlying 
EB-2 visa classification, as either an advanced degree professional or an individual of exceptional 
ability in the sciences, arts, or business. Section 203(b )(2)(B)(i) of the Act. 
Once a petitioner demonstrates EB-2 eligibility, they must then establish that they merit a discretionary 
waiver of the job offer requirement "in the national interest." Section 203(b)(2)(B)(i) of the Act. 
While neither the statute nor the pertinent regulations define the term "national interest," Matter of 
Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. 884, 889 (AAO 2016), provides the framework for adjudicating national 
interest waiver petitions. Dhanasar states that USCIS may, as matter of discretion, 1 grant a national 
interest waiver if the petitioner demonstrates that: 
1 See Flores v. Garland, 72 F.4th 85, 88 (5th Cir. 2023) (joining the Ninth, Eleventh, and D.C. Circuit Courts, and Third 
in an unpublished decision, in concluding that USCIS' decision to grant or deny a national interest waiver is discretionary 
in nature). 
• The proposed endeavor has both substantial merit and national importance; 
• The individual is well positioned to advance their proposed endeavor; and 
• On balance, waiving the job offer requirement would benefit the United States. 
II. ANALYSIS 
The only cited issue in the denial notice is whether the Petitioner has established 
that a waiver of the 
requirement of a job offer, and thus a labor certification, would be in the national interest. The 
Director determined that the Petitioner had established the substantial merit of the proposed endeavor, 
and shown that she is well positioned to advance that endeavor, but that the Petitioner had not 
established the national importance of the endeavor and had not satisfied the third prong of the 
Dhanasar national interest test. 
In her native Colombia, the Petitioner earned a bachelor's degree in accounting in 2015 and ran her 
own com an full-time from 2016 to 2018, continuing part-time through 2021. She worked for the 
from 2018 to 2020, for a forensics firm in 2020, and for 
from 2021 to 2022. In June 2022, the Petitioner entered the United States as a B-2 
nonimmigrant visitor. 
In a statement submitted with the initial filing of the petition, the Petitioner described her proposed 
endeavor, with a focus on small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs): 
My proposal is ... the creation of a consultancy that will provide professional 
accounting and tax Consulting, Advisory and Audit services. It will also provide advice 
for the creation of small and medium-sized companies .... 
The [endeavor] ... is based on a system created by me called _ (Spanish acronym), 
which seeks [to]: 
► Reduce excess operating costs ... ; 
► Help in the economic sustainability of companies through market strategies that 
make them more competitive ... ; 
► Promote the creation and formalization of entrepreneurship and business ideas 
... ; [and] 
► Train and support new and established companies, young entrepreneurs, 
mothers, head[ s] of household and older adults who intend to start their own 
business. 
The Petitioner stated that she would also establish an "educational platform for virtual businesses" in 
which she would provide interdisciplinary "training with a Stem approach (Science, Technology, 
Engineering and Mathematics)." The Petitioner stated that she would begin by "opening an office in 
I ITexas," which would "hire 2 or 3 full-time people," adding to its staff as demand grows. 
2 
In a request for evidence (RFE), the Director requested "[a] detailed description of the proposed 
endeavor." In response, the Petitioner submitted a business plan for a company "which will offer tax 
assistance, advisory services, and business consulting." The Petitioner stated: 
My proposed endeavor is to take advantage of my extensive experience, in the field of 
Accounting and tax Consulting, Advisory and Audit with my skills of understanding 
the unique challenges that companies face .... I have the ability to react effectively to 
business problems ... [ and] to optimize the tools of companies through innovation that 
has resulted in increasing finances in a sustainable way. 
My focus is on the expansive economic recovery of small and medium-sized businesses 
in the United States that were totally affected by the pandemic, natural disasters due to 
climate change among other factors. I will advance my proposed endeavor through 
implementing my business plan, which starts with a consulting firm in the state of 
Texas, then expand to other states such as Florida, Oklahoma and Louisiana .... 
The first Dhanasar prong, substantial merit and national importance, focuses on the specific endeavor 
that the individual proposes to undertake. The endeavor's merit may be demonstrated in a range of 
areas such as business, entrepreneurialism, science, technology, culture, health, or education. In 
determining whether the proposed endeavor has national importance, we consider its potential 
prospective impact. Matter ofDhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. We look for broader implications. An 
endeavor that has significant potential to employ U.S. workers or has other substantial positive 
economic effects, particularly in an economically depressed area, for instance, may well be understood 
to have national importance. Id. at 889-890. 
The Petitioner stated that her proposed endeavor "is nationally important because her undertaking will, 
among other benefits:" 
• Improve businesses' efficiency through accounting consultancy; 
• Incur substantial positive economic effects by supporting small and medium-sized 
businesses, which are a pillar of the U.S. economy; 
• Align with the explicit priorities of U.S. government offices, agencies, and 
initiatives to invest in SMEs; and 
• Fulfill a shortage of tax professionals in the United States. 
The Petitioner submitted background information about accounting and small businesses. 
In the RFE, the Director stated that the Petitioner did not submit enough information about the 
proposed endeavor "to show what specific ways this system may positively affect the accounting field, 
and assist SME's as claimed." The Director also stated that the Petitioner had not established "that 
the specific proposed endeavor has national implications in its field, or that it has the potential for 
significant positive economic effects." The Director asked the Petitioner to explain, in detail, the 
national importance of the proposed endeavor. 
In response, the Petitioner stated that, as a consultant, she "will provide support in the recovery of the 
business with global transformation ... to position the company for sustainable growth." The 
3 
Petitioner asserted that her efforts will "contribute[] significantly to economic reactivation, with 
special emphasis on depressed areas or difficult economic situation[s]." The Petitioner also stated that 
her customers "will be able to strengthen their business position and operations, thereby improving 
the overall economy and business environment in the United States." 
The Petitioner's business plan discussed how businesses rely on accounting and tax services, and 
indicated that the Petitioner's company would help businesses to increase their profits, which in tum 
would result in higher employment and greater tax revenues. 
The Petitioner also submitted further general background information about small businesses, 
unemployment statistics, and digital transformation. 
The Director denied the petition, stating that the Petitioner had not adequately supported claims 
regarding the broader implications of her proposed endeavor. The Director acknowledged the general 
information about SMEs, but concluded: "the record remains insufficient to demonstrate that the 
specific proposed endeavor stands to impact the broader field or industry of marketing and small 
business, or otherwise have implications rising to the level of national importance." The Director 
noted that information about "the profession as a whole" did not establish "the prospective national 
impact of the ... proposed endeavor." 
The Director noted that the Petitioner had proposed a "system of business analysis as her main 
consultancy product offered to potential clients," but the Director determined that the Petitioner had 
not shown that her methods "would result in positive effects and implications for the accounting field 
and for SMEs as a whole that would rise to a level of prospective national importance." The Director 
further concluded that "the record does not include sufficient, objective evidence to demonstrate how 
the endeavor's hiring efforts would have any meaningful impact on unemployment, or have a 
meaningful impact on the creation of significant employment opportunities in general, in the U.S., or 
within the region in which the endeavor will operate," and that "[a]ny larger effect that the petitioner's 
business would have on the U.S. economy has not been established by the evidence and appears to be 
merely hypothetical." 
On appeal, the Petitioner asserts that "each argument" in the record is "supported by objective, 
documentary evidence .... speaking to the inherent benefits of enhancing the economic recovery and 
resilience of small and medium-sized businesses in the United States through innovative and 
sustainable business strategies." The submitted evidence, however, is general in nature, discussing 
the overall, aggregate importance of SMEs to the U.S. economy. The materials do not address the 
Petitioner's proposed endeavor specifically, and therefore they do not establish that her specific 
proposed endeavor would have a significant impact on the recovery and resilience of U.S. small 
businesses at a nationally important level. Benefit to individual clients speaks to the substantial merit 
of the proposed endeavor, which the Director granted. It does not follow that every undertaking that 
stands to benefit some SMEs has national importance. 
The Petitioner asserts that "the impact outlined in the Dhanasar framework does not focus solely on a 
geographical scale." But Dhanasar does require "broader implications" and "substantial positive 
economic effects." Id. at 889-90 ( emphasis added). The burden is on the Petitioner to establish these 
4 
implications and effects, and we agree with the Director that the Petitioner's speculation based on 
general background information does not meet that burden. 
In light of the above conclusions, the Petitioner has not met her burden of proof to show that she fully 
satisfies the first prong of the Dhanasar national interest test. Detailed discussion of the remaining 
prongs cannot change the outcome of this appeal. Therefore, we decline to reach, and hereby reserve, 
the Petitioner's arguments on appeal relating to the third Dhanasar prong. 2 
We do, however, note another issue of concern, relating to the Director's determination that the 
Petitioner had met the requirements to show that she is a member of the professions holding an 
advanced degree. 
A United States bachelor's degree or foreign equivalent degree followed by five years of progressive 
experience in the specialty is the equivalent of a master's degree. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2). The Director 
stated that the Petitioner had documented "progressive work experience in the Accounting field for 
more than five years after completing her Bachelor's Degree in Accounting on March 27, 2015." But 
the record does not support this conclusion. 
From August 2016 to December 2018, the Petitioner worked full time as the executive director of a 
non-profit educational institution known as I I In a statement newly written to support the 
petition, the Petitioner claimed that her duties there included "formulating ... accounting systems," 
but she did not submit necessary evidence to support this assertion or to establish that her work at 
I l was sufficiently related to accounting to qualify as experience in the specialty. Evidence 
of qualifying experience must be in the form of a detailed letter from the employer. See 8 C.F.R. 
§ 204.5(g)( 1 ). In this instance, a translated job verification letter from I I listed ten 
responsibilities, without mention of accounting. Therefore, the preponderance of evidence in the 
record does not establish that the Petitioner's work atl lwas in the specialty in which she 
claims the equivalent of an advanced degree. 
The Petitioner's other claimed full-time employment related more directly to accounting, but spanned 
less than four years from October 2018 to July 2022. Therefore, the record does not support a 
determination that the Petitioner possessed at least five years of progressive post-baccalaureate 
experience in the specialty at the time of filing. Any future filing by the Petitioner must address this 
deficiency with credible, verifiable evidence. 
III. CONCLUSION 
The Petitioner has not established the national importance of the proposed endeavor. Therefore, the 
Petitioner has not shown eligibility for the national interest waiver, and we will dismiss the appeal as 
a matter of discretion. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
2 See INS v. Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. 24, 25-26 (1976) (stating that, like courts, federal agencies are not generally required 
to make findings and decisions unnecessmy to the results they reach); see also Matter ofL-A-C-, 26 I&N Dec. 516, 526 
n.7 (BIA 2015) (declining to reach alternative issues on appeal where an applicant is otherwise ineligible). 
5