dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Animal Health

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: JULY 11, 2024 In Re: 31679072 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, an animal health specialist for small animals and emotional support animals (ESAs), 
seeks classification as an employment-based second preference (EB-2) immigrant as a member of the 
professions holding an advanced degree, as well as a national interest waiver of the job offer 
requirement attached to this classification. See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 
203(b)(2), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(2). 
The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the record did not 
establish that the Petitioner is eligible for a national interest waiver as a matter of discretion and that, 
on balance, it would not be beneficial to the United States to waive the requirements of the job offer, 
and thus of a labor certification.1 The matter is now before us on appeal pursuant to 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 nova. Matter of Christo 's, Inc., 26 l&N Dec. 537, 537 n.2 (AAO 2015). Upon de nova review, 
we will dismiss the appeal. 
I. LAW 
To qualify for the underlying EB-2 visa classification, a petitioner must first establish they are an 
advanced degree professional or an individual of exceptional ability in the sciences, arts, or business. 
Section 203(b)(2)(A) of the Act. 
An advanced degree is any U.S. academic or professional degree or a foreign equivalent degree above 
that of a bachelor's degree. A U.S. 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). 
If a petitioner demonstrates eligibility for the underlying EB-2 classification, they must then establish 
that they merit a discretionary waiver of the job offer requirement "in the national interest." 
1 The Director found that the endeavor has substantial merit and that the Petitioner is well-positioned to advance the 
proposed endeavor. 
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 l&N Dec. 884, 889 (AAO 2016), provides the 
framework for adjudicating national interest waiver petitions. Dhanasar states that U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration Services (USCIS) may, as matter of discretion,2 grant a national interest waiver if 
the petitioner demonstrates that: 
• 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. 
Id. 
11. ANALYSIS 
A. EB-2 Classification 
The Petitioner submitted a Doctor in Veterinary Sciences degree from the _______ 
I 1. 3 The Director concluded that the Petitioner qualifies as a member of the professions 
holding an advanced degree and we agree. 
B. National Interest Waiver 
1. Substantial Merit 
The first 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, entrepreneurial ism, science, technology, culture, health, or education. Dhanasar, 26 l&N 
Dec. at 889. The Petitioner's endeavor is to be an animal health specialist focusing on companion 
animals and Emotional Support Animals (ESAs). The record contains articles, opinion letters, and the 
Petitioner's own statement of intent to provide high-quality services including medical and surgical 
care for small animals, specialized dermatology treatments for companion animals, veterinary clinical 
pathology diagnostics, and expertise in the field of emotional support animals. We agree with the 
Director that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor has substantial merit. 
2. National Importance 
2 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). 
3 We reviewed the American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers (AACRAO) Electronic 
Database for Global Education (EDGE). According to EDGE, the diploma represents attainment of a level of education 
comparable to completion of a vocational or other specialized high school curriculum in the United States. We consider 
EDGE to be a reliable source of information about foreign credential equivalencies. See Confluence Intern., Inc. v. Holder, 
Civil No. 08-2665 (DSD-JJG), 2009 WL 825793 (D. Minn. Mar. 27, 2009); Tisco Group, Inc. v. Napolitano, No. 09-cv-
10072, 2010 WL 3464314 (E.D. Mich. Aug. 30, 2010); Sunshine Rehab Services, Inc. No. 09-13605, 2010 WL 3325442 
(E.D. Mich. Aug. 20, 2010). See also Viraj, LLC v. Holder, No. 2:12-CV-00127-RWS, 2013 WL 1943431 (N.D. Ga. May 
18, 2013). See https://www.aacrao.org/edge/country/paraguay for information regarding the education system in 
Paraguay. 
2 
In determining whether the proposed endeavor has national importance, we consider its potential 
prospective impact. Id. The Director determined that the record did not establish that the proposed 
endeavor is of national importance as the Petitioner did not establish that their proposed endeavor in 
the United States will have a broader impact on the field outside of their prospective company. 
On appeal, the Petitioner asserts generally that the Director improperly imposed a higher standard of 
proof than a preponderance of the evidence, erroneously applied the law, and did not consider the 
totality of the evidence in the record. However, the Petitioner does not support these assertions with 
specificity as to the record or point to how the Director imposed a higher standard. The Petitioner's 
unsupported assertions alone are not sufficient to establish error in the Director's decision nor meet 
her burden of proof to demonstrate eligibility for a national interest waiver. An appeal must 
specifically identify any erroneous conclusion of law or statement of fact in the unfavorable 
decision. See 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(1)(v). Although the Petitioner asserts that she has provided 
evidence sufficient to demonstrate her eligibility for a national interest waiver, she does not specify, 
as required, how the Director erred or what factors in the decision were erroneous. 
As to the national importance of the proposed endeavor specifically, on appeal the Petitioner primarily 
asserts and discusses the following as establishing this requirement: her employment experience, the 
shortage of veterinarians in the United States, that depression and mental health struggles "have 
reached epidemic levels" of a national public health problem and the role animals can play in 
emotional support and alleviating symptoms of various mental health conditions. The Petitioner relies 
on expert opinion and letters of support she provided, her statement, and "Probative Evidence" 
submitted, asserting that her work is considered critical and is aligned with national initiatives. The 
"Probative Evidence" (Petitioner's Exhibit 11) includes: 
• An Advisory Memorandum on Ensuring Essential Critical Infrastructure Workers (sic) Ability 
to Work during the Covid-19 Response, dated December 16, 2020, issued from the U.S. 
Department of Homeland Security Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency; 
• Guidance on ensuring essential critical infrastructure to ensure community and national 
resilience during the Covid-19 response, dated August 18, 2020; 
• Article entitled, How do you Measure the Impact of an Initiative, by Stacey Barr, dated 
September 5, 2017. 
• Blog downloaded January 8, 2024 entitled, The Importance of Initiatives in Successful Strategy 
Execution, by Conor Crimmins, dated May 18, 2021; 
• Article on veterinary shortage from WellHaven (sic) Pet Health, dated March 25, 2023; 
• Fact Sheet regarding Biden-Harris Administration announcing two new actions to address 
youth mental health crisis dated July 29, 2022; 
• Fact Sheet regarding Biden-Harris Administration announcing strategy to address national 
health crisis, as part of Unity Agenda in his first State of the Union, dated March 1, 2022; 
• November 2022 Interim Strategic Plan of the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services 
Administration; 
• Sections of National Institute of Mental Health Strategic Plan addressing striving for 
prevention and cures and advancing mental health services to strengthen health; 
• USDA report regarding Animal Health Program and Animal Welfare Act; 
3 
• KFF (a health policy organization) report on the implications of Covid-19 for mental health 
and substance abuse, dated March 20, 2023; 
• 2021 letter from the American Psychiatric Association {APA) regarding poll showing concern 
about Covid-19 remaining and associated anxiety; 
• October 2020 Center for Disease Control and Prevention report on Youth Risk Behavior 
Trends covering the period of 2009-2019; 
• Article on the mental health crisis among U.S. teens from moneycontrol.com downloaded July 
25, 2023 (undated); 
• 2021 U.S. Surgeon General's Advisory, Protecting Youth Mental Health; 
• American Veterinary Medical Association articles, Service, emotional support, and therapy 
animals (undated) and Animal-assisted intervention: Guidelines; 
• WSAV A.ORG Global Veterinary Community website printout of '"Mission and Plan"; 
• Articles about Veterinarian shortage: Veterinary Shortage: What it Means and What We Can 
(sic) About It, posted March 25, 2023 on WellHaven.com blog, article posted on 
vetrecruiter.com and article in Indianapolis Business Journal (undated); and, 
• NYU Law Review 2006 article, The Race for Talent: Highly Skilled Migrants and Competitive 
Immigration Regimes, by Ayelet Shachar.4 
In determining whether a proposed endeavor has national importance, the relevant question is not the 
importance of the industry, field, or profession in which an individual will work; instead, to assess 
national importance, we focus on the potential prospective impact of the '"specific endeavor that the 
[noncitizen] proposes to unde1iake." See Matter of Dhanasar, 26 l&N Dec. at 889. An endeavor that 
has national or global implications within a particular field, such as those resulting from certain 
improved manufacturing processes or medical advances, may have national importance. Id. 
Additionally, an endeavor that is regionally focused may nevertheless have national importance, such 
as an endeavor that has significant potential to employ U.S. workers or has other substantial positive 
economic effects, particularly in an economically depressed area. Id. at 890. The "Probative 
Evidence" does not suppmi how the Petitioner's particular endeavor rises to national importance, but 
rather addresses the state of mental health in America and generally that there is a shortage of 
veterinarians. 
We have reviewed the Petitioner's business plan and supporting evidence and conclude that it does 
not establish the endeavor's national importance. As the Petitioner states, she plans to "explore" 
several possibilities: developing an integrated mental health support model (integrating veterinary care 
with mental health services), creating personalized ESA training programs, initiating collaborative 
research initiatives, and exploring telemedicine and virtual support. Exploration of these several 
possibilities does not adequately support that the endeavor rises to the level of national importance. 
Next, the Petitioner emphasizes on appeal her experience and expertise in veterinary medicine and 
ESAs as establishing the endeavor's national importance. However, evidence of the Petitioner's 
education, skills, and expertise, including work experience, generally relates to the second prong of 
the Dhanasar framework, which "shifts the focus from the proposed endeavor to the [ noncitizen ]" and 
whether she is well-positioned to advance it. Matter of Dhanasar, 26 l&N Dec. at 890. The issue 
here is whether the Petitioner's specific proposed veterinary endeavor has national importance under 
4 While we may not discuss every document submitted, we have reviewed and considered each one. 
4 
Matter ofDhanasar 's first prong. The evidence of the Petitioner's work experience does not elaborate 
on the Petitioner's specific proposed endeavor nor support its national importance. 
Similarly, the Petitioner's emphasis on the shortage of veterinarians in the United States and the 
importance of improving American mental health is misplaced. In determining whether a proposed 
endeavor has national importance, the relevant question is not the importance of the industry, field, or 
profession in which an individual will work; instead, to assess national importance, we focus on the 
potential prospective impact of the "specific endeavor that the [noncitizen] proposes to undertake." 
See id. at 889. The record does not contain evidence that would support the conclusion that the 
Petitioner's proposed endeavor would lessen the shmiage of veterinarians or increase access to mental 
healthcare in the United States on a scale commensurate with national importance. 
Finally, the Petitioner asserts on appeal that the language of Matter of Dhanasar allows for a regionally 
focused endeavor to nevertheless establish national importance, and that we should "avoid 
overemphasis on the geographic breadth" of the proposed endeavor. The Petitioner is correct that the 
analytical framework introduced in Matter of Dhanasar sought to reduce the focus on the geographic 
impact of an endeavor. See id. at 887. However, the Petitioner does not claim that the Director made 
any specific legal or factual errors related to the regional focus of the Petitioner's proposed endeavor. 
The Director did not rely on the endeavor's lack of geographic breadth in concluding that it lacks 
national importance. Rather, the Director concluded that the Petitioner did not offer sufficient 
information and evidence to establish that the proposed endeavor would have broader implications for 
her field or that it would offer substantial positive economic effects. Upon de nova review, we agree. 
Although an endeavor that is regionally focused may have national importance, it must still have a 
broad impact. Id. at 889. 
The Petitioner's primary contention on appeal is that the Director applied a higher standard of proof 
than the preponderance of the evidence standard and that the nature of the occupation, a shortage of 
veterinarians, a rise in mental health problems, her specialized experience with emotional support 
animals, and her years of experience establish the national importance of the proposed endeavor. In 
support, she largely restates arguments already presented in the RFE response. We have thoroughly 
reviewed the evidence in the record and conclude that although the Petitioner asserts that her proposed 
endeavor has national importance, she offers little corroborative evidence or explanation to support 
these claims. While the Petitioner provided a significant volume of evidence, eligibility for the benefit 
sought is not determined by the quantity of evidence alone but also the quality. Matter of Chawathe, 
25 l&N Dec. at 376 (citing Matter of E-M-, 20 I&N Dec. 77, 80 (Comm'r 1989)). Accordingly, we 
conclude that the Petitioner has not established the national importance of her proposed endeavor. 
In summation, the Petitioner has not established that her proposed endeavor has national importance, 
as required by the first Dhanasar prong; therefore, she is not eligible for a national interest waiver. 
We acknowledge the Petitioner's arguments on appeal as to the second and third prongs of Dhanasar 
but, having found that the evidence does not establish the Petitioner's eligibility under the first prong 
as to national importance, we will not address those arguments here. We reserve our opinion regarding 
whether the record satisfies the second and third Dhanasar prongs. See INS v. Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. 
at 25 (stating that agencies are not required to make "purely advisory findings" on issues that are 
unnecessary to the ultimate decision); see also Matter of L-A-C-, 26 l&N Dec. at 526 n.7 (declining 
to reach alternative issues on appeal where the applicant is otherwise ineligible). 
5 
111. CONCLUSION 
The Petitioner has not met the requisite first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework. We 
therefore conclude that the Petitioner has not established that she is eligible for or otherwise merits a 
national interest waiver as a matter of discretion. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
6