dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Business Coaching

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: JAN. 31, 2024 In Re: 26556062 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, an entrepreneur and coach specialist, seeks classification as an individual of 
exceptional ability. See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 203(b)(2), 8 U.S.C. 
§ 1153(b )(2). The Petitioner also seeks a national interest waiver of the job offer requirement that is 
attached to this EB-2 immigrant classification. See section 203(b )(2)(B)(i) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 
§ 1153(b )(2)(B)(i). U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) may grant this discretionary 
waiver of the required job offer, and thus of a labor certification, when it is in the national interest to 
do so. 
The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the petition, concluding that although the Petitioner 
established that he qualifies as an individual of exceptional ability, he did not demonstrate 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. Next, a 
petitioner must then demonstrate they merit a discretionary waiver of the job offer requirement "in the 
national interest." Section 203(b)(2)(B)(i) of the Act. Matter of Dhanasar, 26 l&N Dec. 884, 889 
(AAO 2016) provides that USCIS may, as matter of discretion, 1 grant a national interest waiver if the 
petitioner shows: 
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). 
• 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 Director concluded that the Petitioner qualifies as an individual of exceptional ability. 
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, substantial merit and national importance, focuses on the specific endeavor that the 
noncitizen proposes to undertake. See Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. 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. 
In an impact analysis report submitted with the petition, the Petitioner stated that he is in the process 
of opening a new companyJ Lwhich will train "entrepreneurs, executives and managers 
to be more effective and to become socially responsible leaders." He farther stated: 
The Company will offer seminars on leadership training, interpersonal intelligence, and 
effective communication. While anyone will be welcome to take the courses, [the 
Petitioner] will target the large Brazilian community inl I, where the company 
will be based. The touchstone for the training will be the ideas ofl I, one 
of the pioneers of the self-improvement movement whose books and articles have been 
chan in readers' lives for more than a cent is a Greek word used in the 
The curriculum to be developed by [the Petitioner] will be geared toward 
entrepreneurs, people in upper tiers of management, business executives, directors, 
supervisors, and anyone who wants to become a more effective leader. 
In addition to this statement, the Petitioner submitted a business plan for his proposed company, as 
well as copies of his academic credentials, certificates of recognition, and letters of recommendation. 
The Director determined that the Petitioner's initial filing did not establish that the proposed endeavor 
had substantial merit or national importance. The Director observed that the Petitioner did not describe 
the endeavor with specificity in order to make such a determination, and noted that the evidence of 
record did not demonstrate that his proposed endeavor would have potential prospect impact, 
significant potential to employ U.S. workers, or other substantial positive economic effects. As a 
result, the Director requested a detailed description of the Petitioner's proposed endeavor in order to 
evaluate his request for a national interest waiver under the Dhanasar framework. 
In response, the Petitioner reiterated that his proposed endeavor was to offer training in personal 
development, leadership and communication, noting that he would offer the following services: 
2 
1. Design and/or conduct training and development programs. 
2. Improve individual skills or organizational performance. 
3. Boost the company's productivity. 
4. Create and implement strategies to increase productivity. 
He also submitted a definitive statement, where he claimed that his services will "develop strategic 
partnerships, identify specific individual needs and implement commercial and marketing strategies." 
He farther stated that his services "can completely change the way the training and development 
market is well positioned and can expand wealth in the US. My proposed venture will make this 
investment a reality, resulting in greater economic contribution to the United States." The Petitioner 
also submitted copies of articles relating to the importance of business development training and 
entrepreneurialism in the United States. 
In denying the petition, the Director determined that the proposed endeavor had substantial merit, but 
concluded the Petitioner provided insufficient evidence to establish the proposed endeavor's national 
importance. The Director determined that the Petitioner had not shown that his proposed endeavor had 
significant potential to employ U.S. workers, would offer substantial positive economic effects for the 
United States, or that the benefits to the national economy resulting from the proposed endeavor would 
reach a level contemplated by the Dhanasar framework. 
On appeal, the Petitioner asserts that he is "a revered professional for his leadership and specialized 
knowledge in training and development," and asserts that his "vast experience in the field will 
significantly contribute to the nation's economy." The Petitioner also emphasizes his qualifications 
as an entrepreneur and coach specialist and asserts that the evidence of record establishes the national 
importance of the proposed endeavor. 
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 
farther 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." 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. 
We agree with the Director that the Petitioner has not demonstrated that the proposed endeavor is of 
national importance. The Petitioner indicated his intent to work as an entrepreneur in the United 
States, noting that he will open his own company and work as a coach specialist to provide training 
and development services to entrepreneurs, managers, and executives. He submitted a business plan 
for his proposed company, which he described as a business consulting service, and maintains that his 
proposed endeavor to establish and provide services through this company has national importance 
because it will impact entrepreneurialism in the United States. 
3 
Throughout the record and again on appeal, the Petitioner points to his background, education, and 
experience in his field. 2 The Petitioner also provided several letters of support that discuss his 
entrepreneurship experience and professional accomplishments as a coach specialist in Brazil. The 
Petitioner's knowledge, skills, and experience in his field, however, relate to the second prong of the 
Dhanasar framework, which "shifts the focus from the proposed endeavor to the foreign national." See 
id at 890. The issue here is whether the specific endeavor that he proposes to undertake has national 
importance under the second consideration of Dhanasar's first prong. 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. The evidence does not suggest that the 
Petitioner's skills differ from or improve upon those already available and in use in the United States. 
Nor does the evidence demonstrate that the use of the Petitioner's experience will reach beyond 
benefitting his own company and clients or have broader implications within the field of business 
development and training. 
The Petitioner claims that his proposed endeavor has national importance because promoting 
entrepreneurship through training and development will benefit commercial markets, foreign 
investment activities, and U.S. business and commercial sectors, and submitted articles in support of 
this assertion. Although the submitted articles discuss the achievements of immigrants as 
entrepreneurs and the shortage of quality trainers and skilled workforce, they are not specific to the 
Petitioner's field or the location of his proposed endeavor. When 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." 
See id. at 889. Much of the Petitioner's evidence relates to the power and impact of entrepreneurship 
generally, rather than his specific proposed endeavor. Even considering the articles in the totality of 
circumstances, we still conclude that they do not support a finding that his specific proposed endeavor 
has national importance. 
Furthermore, 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. Here, the Petitioner has not established 
how his individual employment as a coach specialist and owner of his own company would affect the 
U.S. economy more broadly consistent with national importance. 
We also reviewed the Petitioner's business plan, which anticipates that the company will employ 12 
employees in its first five years. Regarding financial predictions, the Petitioner's business plan 
predicts total revenue of $1.2 million by its fifth year of operations in thel Iarea. The Petitioner, 
however, did not sufficiently describe the origin or basis for these projections and, even ifhe had, they 
would not establish the national importance of the proposed endeavor. 3 As we explained in Dhanasar, 
"[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." See id. at 890. Here, 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 
2 While we do not discuss each piece of evidence individually, we have reviewed and considered each one. 
3 The Petitioner must support his assertions with relevant, probative, and credible evidence. See Matter of Chawathe, 25 
l&N Dec. at 376. 
4 
regarding any projected U.S . economic impact or job creation directly 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 proposed endeavor would reach the level of "substantial positive economic effects" 
contemplated by Dhanasar. Id. 
While the Petitioner 's statements reflect his intention to provide valuable training and development 
services for his clients through his company, he has not offered sufficient information and evidence to 
identify his proposed endeavor with specifici ty or otherwise demonstrate that the prospective impact 
of his proposed endeavor 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. See id. at 893. Here, we conclude the Petitioner has not 
shown that his proposed endeavor stands to sufficiently extend beyond his clientele to impact the U.S. 
economy more broadly at a level commensurate with national importance. 
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. Since this issue is dispositive of the Petitioner 's 
appeal, we decline to reach and hereby reserve the appellate arguments regarding his eligibility under 
the second and third prongs outlined in Dhanasar . See INS v. Bagamasbad, 429 U.S . 24, 25 (1976) 
("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) . 
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 . 
5