dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Business Administration

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 23069363 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: MAR. 21, 2023 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, an entrepreneur with experience in the baking industry, 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 Petitioner 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. 
An advanced degree is any United States academic or professional degree or a foreign equivalent 
degree above that of a bachelor's degree. A United States 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." 
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 I&N Dec . 884, 889 (AAO 2016) provides the 
framework for adjudicating national interest waiver petitions. Dhanasar states U.S. Citizenship and 
Immigration Services (USCIS) may, as matter of discretion, 1 grant a national interest waiver if the 
petitioner shows: 
• 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. 
II. ANALYSIS 
The Petitioner earned a bachelor's degree in business administration from ________ in 
Brazil in 1999 and completed a one-year post-graduate program in industrial administration at the 
The record reflects she has since gained over 15 years of experience as __________ 
an entrepreneur in the bakin indust in Brazil where she served as artner executive director, and 
business advisor with between 
1999 and 2014. The documentation submitted shows that _ __,specializes in the production and 
distribution of industrial bakery machinery. At the time she filed this petition in December 2016, the 
Petitioner provided a resume indicating that since October 2014 she had been employed as a market 
research analyst byl J Florida, after the sale of the company tol I I 2 
The Director determined that the Petitioner established her eligibility as a member of the professions 
holding an advanced degree. 3 Accordingly, the remaining issue to be determined on appeal 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. 
The first prong of the Dhanasar framework, "substantial merit and national importance," focuses on 
the specific endeavor that the individual proposes to undertake. In determining whether the proposed 
endeavor has national importance, we consider its potential prospective impact. Dhanasar, 26 l&N 
Dec. at 889. The Petitioner indicated on the Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker, that she 
intends to work in the United States as an entrepreneur to "[p ]lan, direct, or coordinate the operations of 
public or private sector organizations." The Petitioner initially provided a personal statement indicating: 
I am a professional holding an advanced degree ... with more than twenty-two (22) years 
of progressive work in my field of expertise as an industrial administrator. My expertise 
is well recognized for my achievements and unique methodologies applied in designing 
and implementing effective international and country specific planning strategies, 
business plans and process across industries, such as bakery and pastry equipment 
manufacture and distribution. 
1 See also Poursina v. USCIS, 936 F.3d 868 (9th Cir. 2019) (finding USCIS' decision to grant or deny a national interest 
waiver to be discretionary in nature). 
2 The record indicates that the Petitioner has been the beneficiary of approved nonimmigrant petitions filed by I for 
L-1 status (with a validity period from June 2012 to May 2013) and Hl-B status (with a validity period from September 
2014 to September 2016). 
3 The record establishes that the Petitioner holds the foreign equivalent of a bachelor's degree from an institution of higher 
education in the United States, and that she has at least five years of progressive, post-baccalaureate experience in her 
specialty. See 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3). 
2 
I am certain that my experience will substantially benefit prospectively the national 
economy and work conditions in the United States, in a field that is highly sought by 
employers in the United States of America, that of Business and Industrial Administration 
I am an expert industrial and business administrator, able to obtain outstanding business 
results in this field. I have developed a distinguished reputation and I am certain that I 
will substantially contribute to the improvement of work conditions of U.S. workers 
reducing as well the risk of penalties and fines of U.S. corporations conducting business 
or planning to conduct business in Brazil - which certainly holds substantial intrinsic 
merit in the current global business context .... 
In response to the Director's RFE dated April 2021, the Petitioner stated that during the "five years of 
waiting for an answer from USCIS [she] positioned herself in the local market . . .. " She submitted an 
updated resume, indicating that her employment withl I ended in November 2016 and that she now 
worked as a real estate broker associate with I Florida. She also provided a 
"Personal Plan and Statement" reflecting: 
Since 2014 I am a Licensed Real Estate Agent with residential and commercial sales 
experience and recently a Real Estate Broker Associate. 
[T]his year I have started working withl I I provide real estate investment 
allocation, commercial and residential real estate sale, purchase, construction, and 
remodeling . . . I and I offer a complete service to investors looking to 
start a business in the U.S. or purchase a residential or commercial property in Florida. 
My proposed endeavor in the United States is to continue providing specialized business 
and real estate advisory services to attract primarily international investments and buyers 
originating from Brazil and other Latin American countries to the U.S. The goal of the 
proposed endeavor is to directly contribute to the higher revenues and profits of U.S. 
companies in the real estate industry and indirectly contribute to the business development 
and improved performance of the construction, financial, creative, and other 
complementary industries. 
The I and I have a diversified business model, including real estate sale 
and purchase and investment consulting to all international investors interested in real 
estate. 
3 
The Director determined that the Petitioner demonstrated the proposed endeavor's substantial merit but 
not its national importance. On appeal, the Petitioner's brief indicates that she intends to continue her 
work as a real estate broker in the United States, "attracting volumes of Brazilian investors who want 
to relocate to the U.S. or want to buy a vacation home" and "orchestrating a real estate development 
strategy that targets Brazilians during an historic favorable currency exchange rate." 
As indicated , the Petitioner initially claimed that she intended to continue to work as an entrepreneur 
to "[p ]lan, direct, or coordinate the operations of public or private sector organizations" in the field of 
"Business and Industrial Administration." However, in response to the Director's RFE, the Petitioner 
asserted that she intended to work as a real estate broker associate with I I and submitted 
the aforementioned Personal Plan and Statement. 4 The Petitioner must establish that all eligibility 
requirements for the immigration benefit have been satisfied from the time of filing and continuing 
through adjudication . See 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(l) . Moreover, a petition cannot be approved at a future 
date after the petitioner becomes eligible under a new set of facts. Matter of Izummi, 22 I&N Dec. 169, 
175 (Comm'r 1988). That decision further provides, citing Matter of Bardouille, 18 I&N Dec. 114 (BIA 
1981 ), that USCIS cannot "consider facts that come into being only subsequent to the filing of a petition." 
Id. at 176. Accordingly, we will not consider the Petitioner's materially changed proposed endeavor of 
working as a real estate broker withl I 
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 specific endeavor that the 
foreign national proposes to undertake ." See Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. The Petitioner indicated 
in her initial personal statement that her endeavor will potentially result in: U.S. job creation; 
development of international business partnerships; the negotiation of lucrative projects and cross­
border business transactions; new investment opportunities; and improvement in the working 
conditions of U.S. workers . For the reasons discu ssed below , the Petitioner has not sufficiently 
demonstrated the national importance of her proposed endeavor under the first prong of the Dhanasar 
analytical framework. 5 
In support of her claim that her proposed endeavor has substantial merit and national importance, the 
Petitioner provided an "advisory evaluation" of her eligibility for a national interest waiver froml I I I a professor at I School of Business. According to the evaluator, the 
Petitioner's proposed endeavor will entail "work as a business executive in the bakery and pastry 
equipment manufacturing and distribution industry or another manufacturing related industry for U.S. 
companies doing business or planning to do business in Brazil." 
The advisory opinion discusses the Brazilian economy, explains why Brazil is already viewed as a 
major target for expansion for U.S. multinational companies, and states that many more U.S . 
companies are expected to do business in Brazil to take advantage of market opportunities there. The 
Petitioner must demonstrate the national importance of her specific, proposed endeavor rather than the 
importance of Brazil as a target for expansion for U.S. businesses . In Dhanasar, we 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 implications within a particular field." 
4 The Petitioner 's initial resume and personal statement do not mention! or working in the real estate field. 
5 While we may not discuss every document submitted, we have reviewed and considered each one. 
4 
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. 
In addition, the Petitioner stressed her "more than twenty-two (22) years of progressive work in my 
field of expertise as an Industrial Administrator." Further, several testimonials describe the 
Petitioner's experience and skills in her field and assert she will be an asset in her "industrial 
management bakery career in the United States." For instance, in two letters 
a colleague at I states that the Petitioner helped grow the com any to become a baking 
industry leader by implementing work processes such as the and 
negotiating contracts with bakeries for Walmart, Carrefour, and Subway 
indicates that the Petitioner's trade union negotiations with him improved wages and 
working conditions. I I merger and acquisition consultant, asserts that the 
Petitioner's work on the company's purchase by generated "significant revenues for the 
shareholders of I a representative of I electrical motors 
supplier, provides that the Petitioner utilized more efficient green engines that reduced the company's 
electricity costs. 
The aforementioned letters of support, as well as others not discussed in this decision, detail the 
Petitioner's effectiveness and skills in her previous work as an industrial administrator in Brazil, but 
they do not address the national importance of her proposed endeavor. In addition, the Petitioner's 
experience and abilities in her 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 she proposes to undertake has national importance under 
Dhanasar's first prong. 
As stated, to evaluate whether the Petitioner's proposed endeavor satisfies the national importance 
requirement, we look to evidence documenting the "potential prospective impact" of her work. The 
Petitioner did not offer specific information and evidence to corroborate her assertions that the 
prospective impact of continuing her work as an entrepreneur and advising in bakery and pastry 
equipment manufacture and distribution rises to the level of 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, the record does 
not show, through supporting documentation, how the Petitioner's entrepreneurship and consulting in 
the baking industry stand to sufficiently extend beyond the businesses that might employ her, to impact 
the industry or the U.S. economy more broadly at a level commensurate with national importance. 
Finally, the Petitioner did not show that her initial proposed endeavor has significant potential to 
employ U.S. workers or otherwise offers substantial positive economic effects for our nation. For 
instance, despite indicating that job creation is a potential impact of her proposed endeavor, the 
Petitioner did not provide information and evidence to illustrate the number of individuals she expects 
any proposed new business to hire, train and support. She also did not address how her endeavor 
would have "substantial positive economic effects" based on job creation, and whether it would impact 
an economically depressed region. Without evidence regarding any projected U.S. economic impact 
or job creation attributable to her future work, the record does not show any benefits to the U.S. 
5 
regional or national economy resulting from her entrepreneur position would reach the level of 
"substantial positive economic effects" contemplated by Dhanasar. Id. at 890. 
Because the documentation in the record does not establish the national importance of her initial 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 her eligibility under the second 
and third prongs outlined in Dhanasar, therefore, would serve no meaningful purpose. 6 
III. CONCLUSION 
As the Petitioner has not met the requisite first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework, we conclude 
that she has not demonstrated that she 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. 
6 See INS v. Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. 24, 25 (1976) (stating that "courts and agencies are not required to make findings on 
issues in 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). 
6