dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Architecture

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 20161608 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: FEB. 3, 2022 
Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker (Advanced Degree, Exceptional Ability, National 
Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner , an architect and professor, seeks second preference immigrant classification 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 EB-2 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 Petitioner qualified 
for classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree, but that he had not 
established that a waiver of the required job offer, and thus of the labor certification, would be in the 
national interest. 
On appeal, the Petitioner submits a brief asserting that he is eligible for a national interest waiver. 
In these proceedings, it is the petitioner's burden to establish eligibility for the immigration benefit 
sought. Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361. Upon de nova review, we will dismiss the appeal. 
I. LAW 
To establish eligibility for a national interest waiver, a petitioner must first demonstrate qualification 
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. Because this classification requires that the 
individual's services be sought by a U.S. employer , a separate showing is required to establish that a 
waiver of the job offer requirement is in the national interest. 
Section 203(b) of the Act sets out this sequential framework: 
(2) Aliens who are members of the professions holding advanced degrees or aliens of 
exceptional ability. -
(A) In general. - Visas shall be made available ... to qualified immigrants who are 
members of the professions holding advanced degrees or their equivalent or 
who because of their exceptional ability in the sciences, arts, or business, will 
substantially benefit prospectively the national economy, cultural or 
educational interests, or welfare of the United States, and whose services in the 
sciences, arts, professions, or business are sought by an employer in the United 
States. 
(B) Waiver ofjob offer-
(i) National interest waiver. ... [T]he Attorney General may, when the Attorney 
General deems it to be in the national interest, waive the requirements of 
subparagraph (A) that an alien's services in the sciences, arts, professions, or 
business be sought by an employer in the United States. 
While neither the statute nor the pertinent regulations define the term "national interest," we set forth 
a framework for adjudicating national interest waiver petitions in the precedent decision Matter of 
Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. 884 (AAO 2016). Dhanasar states that after a petitioner has established 
eligibility for EB-2 classification, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) may, as matter 
of discretion 1, grant a national interest waiver if the petitioner demonstrates: ( 1) that the foreign 
national's proposed endeavor has both substantial merit and national importance; (2) that the foreign 
national is well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor; and (3) that, on balance, it would be 
beneficial to the United States to waive the requirements of a job offer and thus of a labor certification. 
The first prong, substantial merit and national importance, focuses on the specific endeavor that the 
foreign national 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. 
The second prong shifts the focus from the proposed endeavor to the foreign national. To determine 
whether he or she is well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor, we consider factors including, 
but not limited to: the individual's education, skills, knowledge and record of success in related or 
similar efforts; a model or plan for future activities; any progress towards achieving the proposed 
endeavor; and the interest of potential customers, users, investors, or other relevant entities or 
individuals. 
The third prong requires the petitioner to demonstrate that, on balance, it would be beneficial to the 
United States to waive the requirements of a job offer and thus of a labor certification. In performing 
this analysis, USCIS may evaluate factors such as: whether, in light of the nature of the foreign 
national's qualifications or the proposed endeavor, it would be impractical either for the foreign 
national to secure a job offer or for the petitioner to obtain a labor certification; whether, even assuming 
that other qualified U.S. workers are available, the United States would still benefit from the foreign 
national's contributions; and whether the national interest in the foreign national's contributions is 
sufficiently urgent to warrant forgoing the labor certification process. In each case, the factor(s) 
1 See also Poursina v. USCIS, No. 17-16579, 2019 WL 4051593 (Aug. 28, 2019) (finding USCIS' decision to grant or 
deny a national interest waiver to be discretionary in nature). 
2 
considered must, taken together, indicate that on balance, it would be beneficial to the United States 
to waive the requirements of a job offer and thus of a labor certification. 2 
II. ANALYSIS 
The Director found that Petitioner qualifies as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree. 
The remaining issue to be determined 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. For the 
reasons discussed below, we agree with the Director that the Petitioner has not sufficiently 
demonstrated the national importance of his proposed endeavor under the first prong of the Dhanasar 
analytical framework. 
Regarding his claim of eligibility under Dhanasar' s first prong, the Petitioner initially indicated that he 
intended to continue his career "in the field of Architecture by applying my skills in designing, planning, 
and developing complex architectural and engineering projects." He asserted that he planned "to continue 
designing, maintaining good working relationships, and identifying any opportunities for development in 
the Architecture industry. My goal is to continue my work coordinating all architecture projects, ... 
lead[ing] companies in developing new architecture projects, ultimately benefiting the United States 
economy." 
The Director issued a request for evidence (RFE) asking the Petitioner to provide further information 
and evidence regarding his proposed endeavor in the United States. He was informed that he should 
submit a "detailed description of the proposed endeavor and why it is of national importance." The 
Petitioner was also asked to present documentary evidence that establishes his proposed endeavor's 
national importance. 
In response to the Director's RFE, the Petitioner stated: "I intend to continue using my demonstrated 
expertise and knowledge in Architecture and Civil Engineering, focusing on teaching in technical and 
advanced schools of architecture, including the drawing techniques and construction design with the BIM 
methodology - Building Information Modeling theme." He indicated that his proposed endeavor 
involves "new buildings under construction, remodeling, or revision of structure for different uses, to 
include: services, institutional or industrial; strategic planning to implement the construction and 
renovation of buildings (developing a layout in the stages of constructive and budgetary feasibility); 
development of products, construction materials, standardization of the use and application of materials; 
and standard of execution of specific details of the construction work." Furthermore, the Petitioner 
asserted that he planned "to start teaching in technical and advanced schools of architecture drawing 
techniques and construction design with the BIM methodology. Also, in the technical exercise in civil 
construction design, I will invite professionals from the construction area to work together." 
In addition, the Petitioner explained that his undertaking is aimed at "studying new buildings under 
construction, which will lead to increased access to affordable housing, quality management and 
construction projects, remodeling or revision of structure, and improved infrastructure development, 
which can facilitate commercial activities as well as social activities throughout the United States." He 
contends that "[b ]y creating new products, images, and layout of agencies, increasing the perception of 
2 See Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 888-91, for elaboration on these three prongs. 
3 
brand value, I can enhance operational efficiency and quality, allowing me to impart my services of 
Architecture and other engineering services locally and globally." 
The record includes information about the architecture profession, construction industry output, the 
architectural industry outlook, the real estate investment industry, U.S. home values, the expansion of 
the U.S. housing market, features that differentiate the U.S. from other industrial economies, the 
effects of domestic investment by international companies on our country's economy, Brazilian 
investment in the South Florida real estate market, the impact of affordable housing on New York 
State's economy, and the cost to the U.S. economy associated with the urban housing shortage. In 
addition, the Petitioner provided articles discussing earnings opportunities in architecture, the benefits 
of affordable housing, economic impacts of commercial real estate, housing's contribution to U.S. 
gross domestic product (GDP), the U.S. commercial real estate outlook, the value of foreign direct 
investment (FDI) to our country's economy, FDI in Florida, increased investment in the U.S. housing 
market, the U.S. affordable housing shortage, rising housing costs' impact on economic mobility, and 
our nation's inadequate supply of affordable homes for low-income families. He also submitted 
information about projected growth in the construction industry, the U.S. need for senior living and 
healthcare architecture, affordable housing's benefit to families and local economies, real estate as a 
source of wealth, housing's connection to economic growth, conditions in the U.S. housing market, 
foreign investment in U.S. real estate, foreign investors' demand for U.S. commercial real estate, the 
national shortage of low-income rental housing, and our nation's housing affordability crisis. The 
record therefore supports the Director's determination that the Petitioner's proposed work as an 
architect and teacher has substantial merit. 
In the decision denying the petition, the Director determined that the Petitioner had not established the 
national importance of his proposed endeavor. The Director stated that the Petitioner's evidence did not 
show that his proposed work stands to have broader implications for the field. In addition, the Director 
indicated that the Petitioner had not demonstrated that his undertaking "has significant potential to employ 
U.S. workers or otherwise offers substantial positive economic effects for our nation." 
In his appeal brief, the Petitioner argues that he "has over 30 years of experience as an Architect and 
Professor of Architecture in Brazil. He has strong technical knowledge and expertise in tools and methods 
that can readily contribute to the socioeconomic needs in the U.S." The Petitioner's skills and knowledge 
in his field relate to the second prong of the Dhanasar framework, which "shifts the focus from the 
proposed endeavor to the foreign national." Id. at 890. The issue here is whether the specific endeavor 
that he proposes to undertake has national importance under Dhanasar' s first prong. 
Furthermore, the Petitioner asserts that his proposed endeavor stands to "substantially enhance the U.S. 
business, real estate, and construction industries, as well as the national economy." He claims that his 
undertaking will "benefit the U.S. economy, generate more revenue, increase the flux of foreign direct 
investments (FDI), and contribute to the generation of jobs in the country." The Petitioner also 
contends that his proposed work "will produce significant national benefits, due to the ripple effects of 
his professional activities." In addition, he states that his endeavor serves the national economy by 
"[s s ]purring economic initiatives on behalf of the United States" and "[p ]rioritizing the domestic job 
market." 
4 
In determining national importance , the relevant question is not the importance of the field, industry , 
or profession in which the individual will work; instead we focus on the "the specific endeavor that 
the foreign national proposes to undertake. " See Dhanasar , 26 I&N Dec. at 889. In Dhanasar, we 
further noted that "we look for broader implications " of the proposed endeavor and that "[a]n 
undertaking may have national importance for example, because it has national or even global 
implication s within a particular field." Id. We also stated that "[a]n 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 890. 
To evaluate whether the Petitioner's proposed endeavor satisfies the national importance requirement 
we look to evidence documenting the "potential prospective impact " of his work. While the 
Petitioner's statements reflect his intention to provide valuable architectural and teaching services for 
his industry , he has not offered sufficient information and evidence to demon strate that the prospecti ve 
impact of his proposed endeavor rises to the level of national importance. In Dhana sar we determined 
that the petitioner's teaching activities did not rise to the level of having national importance because 
they would not impact his field more broadly. Id. at 893. Here, we conclude the record does not show 
that the Petitioner 's proposed endeavor stands to sufficiently extend beyond his architectural and 
teaching projects to impact the field or the U.S. economy more broadly at a level commensurate with 
national importance . 
Furthermore, the Petitioner has not demonstrated that the specific endeavor he proposes to undertake 
has significant potential to employ U.S. workers or otherwise offers substantial positive economic 
effects for our nation . Without sufficient information or evidence regarding any projected U.S. economic 
impact or job creation attributable to his future work, the record does not show that benefits to the U.S. 
regional or national economy resulting from the Petitioner's architectural and teaching projects would 
reach the level of "substantial positive economic effects" contemplated by Dhanasar. Id. at 890. 
Accordingly, the Petitioner's propo sed work does not meet the first prong of the Dhanasar framework. 
Because the documentation in the record does not establish the national importance of his proposed 
endeavor as required by the first prong of the Dhanasar precedent decision, the Petitioner has not 
demonstrated eligibility for a national interest waiver. Further analysis of his eligibility under the second 
and third prongs outlined in Dhanasar, therefore, would serve no meaningful purpose. 
III. CONCLUSION 
As the Petitioner has not met the requisite first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework, we conclude 
that he has not established he is eligible for or otherwise merits a national interest waiver as a matter 
of discretion . The appeal will be dismissed for the above stated reasons , with each considered as an 
independent and alternate basis for the decision. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
5