dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Artificial Intelligence

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: SEP. 20, 2024 In Re: 33943641 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, a researcher, seeks employment-based second preference (EB-2) 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 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 established 
that the Petitioner qualified for classification, 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. 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 ofChawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369, 375-76 (AAO 2010). We review the questions in this matter 
de novo. Matter of Christo 's, Inc., 26 l&N Dec. 537, 537 n.2 (AAO 2015). Upon de novo review, 
we will dismiss the appeal. 
I. LAW 
To qualify for the underlying EB-2 visa classification, a petitioner must 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. 
Profession is defined as one of the occupations listed in section 101(a)(32) of the Act, as well as any 
occupation for which a U.S. baccalaureate degree or its foreign equivalent is the minimum requirement 
for entry into the occupation. 1 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2). 
1 Profession shall include but not be limited to architects, engineers, lawyers, physicians, surgeons, and teachers in 
elementary or secondary schools, colleges, academics, or seminaries. Section 10l(a)(32) of the Act. 
If a petitioner establishes eligibility for the underlying EB-2 classification, they must then demonstrate 
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 T&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. 
II. ANALYSIS 
In denying the petition, the Director concluded that while the Petitioner qualifies as a member of the 
professions holding an advanced degree, he had not established that a waiver of the requirement of a 
job offer, and thus a labor certification, would be in the national interest. Specifically, the Director 
determined that the Petitioner's endeavor did not meet the Dhanasar framework's requirements for 
national importance, nor did the Petitioner establish that, on balance, waiving the job offer requirement 
would benefit the United States. 3 Based on our de novo review of the record, we agree that the 
Petitioner has not sufficiently demonstrated the national importance of his proposed endeavor under 
the first prong of the Dhanasar framework. 
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, entrepreneurialism, science, technology, culture, health, or education. In determining 
whether the proposed endeavor has national importance, we consider its potential prospective impact. 
Id. at 889. 
On the Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers, the Petitioner listed his occupation as a 
researcher in artificial intelligence and that his job title in the proposed employment was "research 
scientist." He described his job as developing a semantic communication network with artificial 
intelligence functions, which he asserted had significant global impact, in order to efficiently deliver 
semantic content and enhance user experience and security. The Petitioner stated that he is a doctoral 
student at a U.S. university and plans to pursue a future position at a social media platform or a similar 
employer. In support of his claim that his research is of national importance, he argued that it would 
strengthen cybersecurity. He additionally argued that it advances autonomous vehicle technology and 
enhances traffic management systems, which he contended improves transportation safety and 
efficiency. The Petitioner claimed that his research has received funding from several U.S. federal 
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 The Director also found that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor had substantial merit and that the Petitioner was well­
positioned to advance it. 
2 
government agencies. The Petitioner additionally submitted letters of recommendation, his resume, 
academic records, publications he has authored, information about his asserted funding sources, and 
industry reports and articles. 
In determining national importance, "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 implications within a particular field." See Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. In Dhanasar, we 
determined that the petitioner's teaching activities, even in a field with substantial merit in relation to 
U.S. educational interests, did not rise to the level of having national importance because they would 
not impact his field more broadly. Id. at 893. 
The Petitioner generally argues on appeal that he has already submitted sufficient evidence of his 
eligibility for the national interest waiver, including the national importance of his proposed endeavor. 
In support of these arguments, the Petitioner re-states the description of his endeavor and excerpts his 
previous statements in the record. He contends that the Director incorrectly evaluated the Petitioner's 
proposed endeavor and failed to consider all of the relevant evidence. 
Specifically, the Petitioner contends the Director's denial did not include a required "discretionary 
analysis" and was therefore arbitrary. In doing so, he cites 1 USCJS Policy Manual E.9(8)(3) 
https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual. USCIS may, as matter of discretion, 4 grant a national interest 
waiver to a Petitioner who meets the eligibility requirements outlined in our precedent decision in 
Dhanasar. According to the cited chapter of the USCJS Policy Manual, ifUSCIS denies a request as 
a matter of discretion, the denial will explain the reasons the request was not granted. Despite the 
Petitioner's contentions, the Director's decision in the matter at hand thoroughly analyzed the 
Petitioner's eligibility for the requested benefit and provided explanations for the denial. 
Next, the Petitioner further argues that Dhanasar does not require a showing of prospective impact. 
As previously noted, this is incorrect. See Dhanasar, 889 ("In determining whether the proposed 
endeavor has national importance, we consider its potential prospective impact"). 
We recognize the importance of artificial intelligence research and note that the Director found the 
Petitioner's endeavor to have substantial merit. But 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." Dhanasar, at 889. The term "endeavor" is 
more specific than the general occupation; a petitioner should offer details not only as to what the 
occupation normally involves, but what types of work the person proposes to undertake specifically 
within that occupation. See generally 6 USCIS Policy Manual F.5(D)(l), 
https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual. Simply being employed in an occupation does not constitute 
an endeavor for the purposes of these proceedings. To the extent his current doctoral research and 
career goals constitute an endeavor, the record does not contain sufficient evidence describing the 
Petitioner's endeavor and its future potential impact. For example, the three recommendation letters 
describe the Petitioner's past contributions to artificial intelligence research. However, they do not 
describe the endeavor itself, the Petitioner's future plans, or how they would rise to the level of national 
4 See also Poursina v. USCJS, 936 F.3d 868 (9th Cir. 2019) (finding USCIS' decision to grant or deny a national interest 
waiver to be discretionmy in nature). 
3 
importance. The Petitioner asserts that U.S. government agencies fund his work, but he has not 
supported this claim with documentary evidence. Although the Petitioner contends that he will seek 
employment after he finishes his doctorate, he did not establish what this employment would be and 
how it would be nationally important. 
Finally, the Petitioner asserts that he was not required to show his endeavor's substantial positive 
economic effects. Although the Petitioner is correct, he has not demonstrated how the Director 
purportedly required him to make such a showing. A petitioner's proposed endeavor can rise to the 
level of national importance through establishing one or more of the criteria. This can include and is 
not limited to economic effects. However, in any given set of facts, it is a petitioner's burden to show 
by a preponderance of the evidence (more likely than not) that the proposed endeavor is of national 
importance. Matter ofChawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369,376 (AAO 2010). A petitioner must also support 
assertions with relevant, probative, and credible evidence. See Matter of Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. at 
376. As the Petitioner has not done so here, he has not sufficiently established that his proposed 
endeavor in the United States will have national importance under the first Dhanasar prong. 
Since the identified basis for denial is dis positive of the Petitioner's appeal, we decline to reach and 
hereby reserve the remaining eligibility requirements for the requested national interest waiver. See 
INS v. Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. 24, 25 (1976) (stating that agencies are not required to make "purely 
advisory findings" on issues that are unnecessary to the ultimate decision); see also Matter ofL-A-C- , 
26 I&N Dec. 516, 526 n. 7 (BIA 2015) ( declining to reach alternative issues on appeal where the 
applicant did not otherwise meet their burden of proof). 
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. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
4