dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Business

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: DEC. 16, 2024 In Re: 35259995 
Motion on Administrative Appeals Office Decision 
Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, a chief executive officer, seeks employment-based second preference (EB-2) 
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 did not 
establish that a waiver of the required job offer, and thus of the labor certification, would be in the 
national interest. We dismissed a subsequent appeal. The Petitioner filed a combined motion to reopen 
and reconsider, which we dismissed because the Petitioner had not met the requirements of a motion 
to reopen or reconsider. The matter is now before us on a motion to reconsider. 
The Petitioner bears the burden of proof to demonstrate eligibility by a preponderance of the evidence. 
Matter of Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369, 375-76 (AAO 2010). Upon review, we will dismiss the 
motion. 
A motion to reconsider must establish that our prior decision was based on an incorrect application of 
law or policy and that the decision was incorrect based on the evidence in the record of proceedings 
at the time of the decision. 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(3). Our review on motion is limited to reviewing our 
latest decision. 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(l)(ii) . We may grant motions that satisfy these requirements and 
demonstrate eligibility for the requested benefit. 
On motion, the Petitioner aims to address and clarify key aspects of his case, particularly that his 
proposed endeavor has substantial merit and national importance. The Petitioner contends that his 
endeavor has the potential to significantly impact the national economy and benefit national security. 
In support of his motion, the Petitioner submits a brief along with previously submitted documents, 
arguing that his evidence demonstrates his proposed endeavor's national importance. However, as we 
mentioned above, a motion's scope is limited to "the prior decision" and "the latest decision in the 
proceeding." Id. In other words, today's review is limited to our July 2024 decision dismissing the 
first motion. The Petitioner's submission establishes no error in that decision, as he merely reasserts 
arguments we have already considered and found unpersuasive in both of our previous decisions. 1 See 
1 We will not repeat here the conclusions reached in our prior decisions. 
e.g., Matter of O-S-G-, 24 I&N Dec. 56, 58 (BIA 2006) ("a motion to reconsider is not a process by 
which a party may submit, in essence, the same brief presented on appeal and seek reconsideration by 
generally alleging error in the prior Board decision"). Moreover, the Petitioner has not established 
that our previous decision was based on an incorrect application of law or policy at the time we issued 
our decision. Accordingly, the motion will be dismissed. 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(4). The Petitioner's 
appeal therefore remains dismissed, and his underlying petition remains denied. 
ORDER: The motion to reconsider is dismissed. 
2