dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Business Development

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: MAY 13, 2024 In Re: 31208282 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner seeks second preference immigrant classification as a member of the professions 
holding an advanced degree or as an individual of exceptional ability, as well as a national interest 
waiver of the job offer requirement attached to this EB-2 classification. 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 the Petitioner had not 
established eligibility for 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 Christa's , Inc., 26 I&N Dec. 537,537 n.2 (AAO 2015). Upon de novo review, 
we will dismiss the appeal. 
To establish eligibility for a national interest waiver, petitioners must 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. In addition, 
petitioners must show the merit of a discretionary waiver of the job offer requirement "in the national 
interest." Section 203(b )(2)(B)(i) of the Act. Matter ofDhanasar, 26 l&N Dec. 884, 889 (AAO 2016) 
provides that U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) may, as matter of discretion, 1 grant 
a national interest waiver if: 
• 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 job offer requirement would benefit the United States. 
Regarding the national interest waiver, the first prong relates to substantial merit and national 
importance of the specific proposed endeavor. Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. The Petitioner stated: 
1 See also 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 to be 
discretionary in nature). 
[He] intends to continue using his expertise and knowledge to work as an Entrepreneur 
and contribute to the U.S. economy through business development activities. He will 
do this by further developing and expanding his already registered company in the 
nation,I I-which is incorporated in the state of Florida. The business is a cell­
phone accessory kiosk, which is designed to offer high-quality accessories in the retail 
industry; it is primarily located across U.S. malls and shopping center. 
On appeal, the Petitioner maintains: 
[He] intends to continue his career in the United States as an Entrepreneur and Business 
Professional, in which capacity he will enhance the revenue of U.S. companies, thus 
elevating their productivity patterns and market growth. This will improve the United 
States' business sphere, and further position the nation as a business hub within the 
global economy. He will also create jobs and generate tax revenue through his U.S. 
based company. In both instances, [he] will provide significant sales growth potential 
and significant employment opportunities for the nation, which will ultimately impact 
the productivity of the U.S. business ecosystem, as well as national economic activities. 
As it relates to substantial merit, the endeavor's merit may be demonstrated in a range of areas such 
as business, entrepreneurialism, science, technology, culture, health, or education. Dhanasar, 26 I&N 
Dec. at 889. The Petitioner provided "Industrial Reports and Articles" covering various topics, 
including entrepreneurialism, thereby satisfying the substantial merit of his 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 specific endeavor that the 
foreign national proposes to undertake." See Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. Although the Petitioner 
emphasizes "the important role that business development professionals play in every type of 
business" and references the "Industrial Reports and Articles" involving broad topics, such as small 
businesses, top executives, risk management, and immigrant investment, the Petitioner must 
demonstrate the national importance of his specific, proposed endeavor of owning and operating his 
particular cellphone accessory business. 2 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." 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. 
Moreover, the Petitioner repeatedly stresses his "progressive experience," "theoretical and 
professional experience," "expertise and extensive experience," "international management 
experience," "numerous roles," "professional record," "record of his business achievements and 
expertise," "direct knowledge of the business operations and management," and "knowledge and 
2 The Petitioner's arguments and evidence relate to the substantial merit aspect of the proposed endeavor rather than the 
national importance part. 
2 
connections." However, the Petitioner's knowledge, skills, and abilities 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 he proposes to undertake has national 
importance under 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. Dhanasar, 26 I&N 
Dec. at 889. Here, the Petitioner did not demonstrate how his cellphone accessory business largely 
influences the field and rises to the level of national importance. In Dhanasar, we determined 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. The record does not show through supporting 
documentation how his endeavor sufficiently extends beyond his prospective customers, to impact the 
field or the U.S. economy more broadly at a level commensurate with national importance. 
Finally, the Petitioner did not demonstrate how his business plan's claimed employment and tax 
projections, even if credible or plausible, have significant potential to employ U.S. workers or 
otherwise offers substantial positive economic effects for our nation. Although the business plan 
claims the creation of 159 positions after five years, the Petitioner did not demonstrate that such future 
staffing levels would provide substantial economic benefits to the I I Florida region or other 
anticipated regions or the U.S. economy more broadly at a level commensurate with national 
importance. The Petitioner, for instance, did not show that such employment figures would utilize a 
significant population of workers in the area or would substantially impact job creation and economic 
growth, either regionally or nationally. Similarly, while the business plan claims $4. lM in cumulative 
tax generation after five years, the Petitioner did not establish that such figures would reach the level 
of "substantial positive economic effects" contemplated by Dhanasar. Id. at 890. For all these 
reasons, the record does not establish that, beyond the limited benefits provided to its prospective 
clients and employees, the Petitioner's proposed endeavor has broader implications rising to the level 
of having national importance or that it would offer substantial positive economic effects. 
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. Further analysis of his eligibility under the second 
and third prongs outlined in Dhanasar, therefore, would serve no meaningful purpose, as well as a review 
of the Director's favorable determination of the Petitioner's eligibility as an individual of exceptional 
ability. 3 
As the Petitioner has not met the requisite first prong ofthe Dhanasar analytical framework, we conclude 
that he has not demonstrated eligibility 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. 
3 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 l&N Dec. 516,526 n.7 (BIA 2015) 
( declining to reach alternate issues on appeal where applicants do not otherwise meet their burden of proof). 
3