dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Business Administration

U.S. Citizenship Non-Precedent Decision of the
and Immigration Administrative Appeals Office 
Services 
In Re: 26399940 Date: MAY 2, 2023 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, a business administrator, 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 immigrant 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 she 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. 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 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. Section 203(b )(2)(B)(i) of the Act. 
Once a petitioner demonstrates eligibility as either a member of the professions holding an advanced 
degree or an individual of exceptional ability, 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 "nationa l interest," Matter of 
Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. 884 (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 1, grant a national interest waiver if the petitioner demonstrates that: 
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) . 
• The proposed endeavor has both substantial merit and national importance; 
• The individual is well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor; and 
• On balance, waiving the requirements of a job offer and a labor certification would benefit the 
United States. 
II. ANALYSIS 
The Director found that the 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 waiver of 
the requirement of a job offer, and thus a labor certification, would be in the national interest. As the 
Director determined that the Petitioner's endeavor has substantial merit but not national importance 
under the first prong of Dhanasar, we will only analyze whether the Petitioner's endeavor is of 
national importance. If the Petitioner does not meet the first prong, the evidence is dispositive in 
finding the Petitioner ineligible for the national interest waiver, and we need not address the second 
and third prongs. 
Although the Petitioner asserts on appeal that the Director's decision "contains numerous erroneous 
conclusions of both law and fact," she does not indicate where the Director misapplied law or policy 
in the decision. The Petitioner mainly contends that she has previously provided sufficient evidence 
to show the national importance of her proposed endeavor. We examined the record including the 
Petitioner's professional plan, articles and reports on small businesses and labor shortage, letters of 
recommendation, two expert opinion letters, and U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) occupational 
outlook report on the industry of administrative services. While we do not discuss each piece of 
evidence individually, we have reviewed and considered each one. Upon de novo review, we agree 
with the Director that the Petitioner did not demonstrate her endeavor satisfies the national importance 
element ofDhanasar's first prong, as discussed below. 
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. Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. 
The Petitioner's initial professional plan from September 2021 states that she proposes to work for 
companies in the United States to offer her services as a business administrator and help small and 
medium-size enterprises in the U.S. "to improve operations and achieve better productivity and 
profitability levels." 
In response to the Director's request for evidence (RFE), the Petitioner submitted an updated 
professional plan that further elaborates and expands her proposed activities as a business 
administrator. The Petitioner states that she "will offer a wide range of services and solutions to 
organizations located in the U.S. to be more than a consultancy, to support and commit to the client in 
building customized solutions" and her endeavor "involves specific and high qualified work that is 
not commonly found, notably with the high degree of excellence." However, the proposed activities 
in her new professional plan entail typical work of a business administrator, such as planning and 
executing projects to produce profits, optimizing cost reduction, identifying and evaluating new 
2 
opportumt1es, promoting growth in operational results, carrying out people management, and 
monitoring macro actions and results to formulate business strategies. 
The Petitioner claims that we should evaluate the prospective impact of her endeavor based on her 
past achievements and experience. The Petitioner further asserts the evidence demonstrates how she 
has contributed to success of businesses throughout her career by increasing sales and revenues, 
opening new business locations, and creating jobs. However, the Petitioner's knowledge, skills, 
education, and experience are considerations under Dhanasar' s second prong, which "shifts the focus 
from the proposed endeavor to the foreign national." Id. at 890. The issue under the first prong is 
whether the Petitioner has demonstrated the national importance of her proposed work. 
We reviewed the Petitioner's resume and letters ofrecommendation from her former co-workers. The 
authors of the letters praise the Petitioner's abilities a business administrator, and the personal attributes 
that make her an asset to the workplace. While the recommendation letters evidence the high regard 
for the Petitioner and her work, they do not discuss the Petitioner's proposed endeavor or specific 
impact of her endeavor. 
The Petitioner also submitted two expert opinion letters, one from I I a professor at 
University of School of Management, and I I an associate 
professor of marketing atl !University. I ldiscusses the Petitioner's 
skills and abilities as a business administrator and speculates on how her services can potentially 
improve business practices and improve productivity of companies but does not offer any persuasive 
detail concerning the Petitioner's proposed endeavor or how her endeavor's impact would extend 
beyond companies that she will serve. 
Similarly,! lstates that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor has significant potential 
to employ U.S. workers, especially in economically depressed areas of the United States, and that she 
will "implement her unique methods and strategies to increase U.S. business revenue by providing her 
expertise in entering the Latin American market." However, the Petitioner has not submitted that her 
proposed endeavor will employ U.S. workers in economically depressed regions or that she plans to 
specifically assist companies that enter the Latin American market. As such, these letters are not 
probative of the Petitioner's eligibility under the first prong of Dhanasar. 
The Petitioner further contends that her proposed endeavor is nationally important based on reports 
and articles about the industry in which the Petitioner proposes to work. The Petitioner explains that 
rapidly growing business consulting industry is facing a talent shortage, thus business and 
management professionals are integral to the business sector's success. The Petitioner also asserts 
that the United States government's initiatives regarding small businesses raise the national 
importance of her endeavor. We acknowledge that the Petitioner's work in business administration is 
in high demand and assisting small businesses to flourish has substantial merit. However, merely 
working in an important field is insufficient to establish the national importance of the proposed 
endeavor. In determining national importance, the relevant question is not the importance of the 
industry or profession in which the individual will work; instead, we focus on the "the specific 
endeavor that the foreign national proposes to undertake." Id. at 889. 
3 
In Dhanasar, we noted that "we look for broader implications" of the proposed endeavor and that 
"[aa ]n undertaking may have national importance for example, because it has national or even global 
implications within a particular field." Id. We 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. 
The Petitioner contends that by providing business administration services to small and medium 
businesses to improve business strategies, gain business contracts, and increase administrative 
efficiencies in the United States would lead to "a series of attached causes/consequences" that would 
ultimately lead to significant potential to employ U.S. workers or substantial positive economic 
benefits. While any basic economic activity has the potential to positively impact the economy, the 
record does not demonstrate how working for a company or companies as an individual business 
administrator 2 generates such significant economic activity that rises to the level of "substantial 
positive economic effects" contemplated by Dhanasar. Id. 
Without evidence regarding any projected U.S. economic impact or job creation directly attributable 
to her future work, the Petitioner's claims linking her proposed endeavor to "significant potential to 
maintain the U.S. workforce production at a fast pace," "generation ofrevenue, creation, and support 
of U.S. jobs," and "increasing tax revenues to the federal and state governments" are too attenuated to 
sufficiently show the proposed endeavor's impact at a level commensurate with national importance. 
In Dhanasar, 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 find 
that while individual employer or company may benefit from her business services, she has not offered 
a sufficient explanation for how this individual benefit rises to the level of national importance or will 
impact the field more broadly. The Petitioner also does not suggest that her business techniques or 
innovations are unavailable in the United States or better than that which is already offered in the 
United States: "[a]n undertaking may have national importance for example, because it has national 
or even global implications within a particular field, such as those resulting from certain improved 
manufacturing processes or medical advances." Id. at 889. Accordingly, we find that the Petitioner 
has not established that her proposed endeavor has national importance. 
Because the documentation in the record does not establish the national importance of her proposed 
endeavor as required by the first prong of the Dhanasar precedent decision, the Petitioner has not 
demonstrated eligibility for a national interest waiver. As the identified reasons for dismissal are 
dispositive of the Petitioner's appeal, we decline to reach and hereby reserve remaining arguments 
concerning eligibility under the Dhanasar framework. See INS v. Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. 24, 25 
(1976) (stating that "courts and agencies are not required to make findings on issues the decision of 
which is unnecessary 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). 
2 The Petitioner submitted as evidence a job offer email from a data company that pays for work-from-home 
projects involving data collection and evaluation. 
4 
III. CONCLUSION 
As the Petitioner has not met the requisite first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework, we find 
that she has not established she is eligible for or otherwise merits a national interest waiver as a matter 
of discretion. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
5