dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Business Intelligence And Sustainability

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: JAN. 03, 2025 In Re: 34829841 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner seeks employment-based second preference (EB-2) immigrant classification as an 
individual of exceptional ability as well as a national interest waiver of the job offer requirement 
attached to this 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 
did not establish eligibility as an individual of exceptional ability or for a national interest waiver. 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 l&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. 
I. LAW 
To qualify for the underlying EB-2 visa classification, a petitioner must establish they are an advanced 
degree professional or an individual of exceptional ability in the sciences, arts, or business. Section 
203(b )(2)(A) of the Act. 
Exceptional ability means a degree of expertise significantly above that ordinarily encountered in the 
sciences, arts, or business. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2). A petitioner must initially submit documentation 
that satisfies at least three of six categories of evidence. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(ii)(A)-(F). 1 Meeting 
at least three criteria, however, does not, in and of itself, establish eligibility for this classification. 2 If 
a petitioner does so, we will then conduct a final merits determination to decide whether the evidence 
in its totality shows that they are recognized as having the requisite degree of expertise and will 
substantially benefit the national economy, cultural or educational interests, or welfare of the United 
States. Section 203(b )(2)(A) of the Act. 
If a petitioner establishes eligibility for the underlying EB-2 classification, they must then demonstrate 
that they merit a discretionary waiver of the job offer requirement "in the national interest." 
1 If these types of evidence do not readily apply to the individual's occupation, a petitioner may submit comparable 
evidence to establish their eligibility. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(iii). 
2 USCIS has previously confinn ed the applicability of this two-part adjudicative approach in the context of individuals of 
exceptional ability. 6 USCIS Policy Manual F.5(B)(2), https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual/volume-6-p art-f-chapter-5 . 
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 that U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration Services (USCIS) may, as matter of discretion,3 grant a national interest waiver if 
the petitioner demonstrates that: 
• 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. 
Id. at 889. 
II. ANALYSIS 
A. EB-2 Visa Classification 
The Director determined that the Petitioner does not qualify as an individual of exceptional ability. 
Because the evidence in the record does not establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the 
Petitioner is eligible for, or otherwise merits, a national interest waiver as a matter of discretion, we 
will reserve the issue of whether he qualifies for EB-2 classification as an individual of exceptional 
ability for future consideration should the need arise. 4 
B. Substantial Merit and National Importance 
In the petition, the Petitioner stated that he intended to be a Business Intelligence Analyst, and he 
described the duties as follows: ". . . produce financial insights via data queries, reporting, and 
pattern spotting." In his introductory cover letter, he expounded on his occupation as a Sustainability 
and Business Intelligence Consultant. In response to a request for evidence, the Petitioner submitted 
additional evidence in which he declared that his "proposed endeavor focuses on assuming the role of 
an Agile Consultant/Technology Project Manager, responsible for implementing and optimizing Agile 
processes within a company." The Petitioner further explained, in detail, the role of an Agile 
Consultant in an organization. The Director concluded that the Petitioner's initial proposed endeavor 
of being a Sustainability and Business Intelligence Consultant inl ITexas had substantial merit. 
However, the Director correctly determined that the Petitioner made a material change to his endeavor. 
The Petitioner must establish all eligibility requirements for the immigration benefit have been satisfied 
from the time filing and continuing through adjudication. See 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(l), (12); Matter of 
Katigbak, 14 I&NDec. 45, 49 (Reg'l Comm'r 1971). Further, a petitionermaynotmakematerial changes 
to a petition that has already been filed in an effort to make a deficient petition conform to USCIS 
requirements. Matter ofIzummi, 22 I&N Dec. 169, 175 (Assoc. Comm'r 1988). Accordingly, we will 
not consider the Petitioner's materially changed proposed endeavor of assuming the role of an Agile 
Consultant/Technology Project Manager and will only address his initial proposed endeavor of being a 
Sustainability and Business Intelligence Consultant. 
3 See Flores v. Garland. 72 F.4th 85, 88 (5th Cir. 2023) (joining the Third, Ninth, Eleventh, and D.C. Circuit Courts in 
concluding that USCIS' decision to grant or deny a national interest waiver is discretionary in nature). 
4 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"). 
2 
The Director determined that the Petitioner did not establish that his proposed endeavor in his role as 
a Sustainability and Business Intelligence Consultant met the national importance element of the first 
prong of the Dhanasar framework. The first prong, substantial merit and national importance, focuses 
on the specific endeavor that the individual 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. 
On appeal, the Petitioner states that the decision was influenced by a discriminatory factor, 
specifically, racial prejudice. We note that there was no racial animus conveyed in the decision, and 
the Petitioner does not explain why he makes this unsupported claim. We agree with the Director that 
the Petitioner established that his proposed endeavor in the field of sustainability and business 
intelligence has substantial merit, but not national importance. For the reasons set forth below, we 
conclude that the Petitioner has not met the first prong of the Dhanasar framework and will dismiss 
the appeal accordingly. 5 
On appeal, the Petitioner states his "proposal seeks to secure positions within US companies, focusing 
on sustainability initiatives and leveraging expertise in both sustainability and business intelligence, 
along with agile methodologies and project management experience. By integrating these diverse skill 
sets, my profile and role becomes a linchpin in addressing critical issues such as climate change, 
urbanization, and environmental degradation while promoting economic growth, social equity, and 
environmental stewardship." He indicates that he ".... could identify opportunities for optimizing 
resource utilization, reducing carbon emissions, and enhancing overall efficiency in urban 
infrastructure and services." The Petitioner notes that, "In a world whit [sic] a rapidly evolving global 
landscape, the role of a Sustainability & Business Intelligence Consultant is of paramount importance 
not only for individual companies but also for the broader national and global economy. I have 
experience and have held responsibilities in supply chain management within the Oil & Gas industry, 
which has prepared me well to drive transformative projects aimed at sustainable economic 
development while also advancing economic growth and competitiveness." The Petitioner proffers 
that by combining his skill sets, he "could become an invaluable asset in driving sustainable projects 
across the United States." Importantly, the Petitioner addresses the value of the proposed role of a 
Sustainability and Business Intelligence Consultant in evincing national importance. He asserts that 
the ". . . proposal of this role demonstrates national importance to the United States by addressing 
critical issues such as climate change, urbanization, and environmental degradation. Evidence 
documenting the potential prospective impact of sustainable projects showcases their significance in 
mitigating carbon emissions, fostering economic growth, and enhancing quality of life." However, 
the record does not establish the Petitioner's proposed endeavor would have broad enough impact 
sufficient to rise to the level of national importance. 
To evaluate whether the Petitioner's proposed endeavor satisfies the national importance requirement, 
we look to evidence documenting the "potential prospective impact" of the Petitioner's work. We 
focus on the "the specific endeavor that the foreign national proposes to undertake." Dhanasar at 889. 
5 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. 
3 
While the Petitioner claims that his proposed endeavor serving as a Sustainability and Business 
Intelligence Consultant is of national importance because he will lead "the charge in incentivizing 
clean energy production, reducing carbon emissions, and creating green job opportunities," he has not 
offered sufficient information and evidence to demonstrate that the prospective impact of his proposed 
endeavor rises to the level of national importance. For example, the record does not include any 
forecasts regarding job creation, revenue and wages. Moreover, he does not indicate that he will 
operate in an economically depressed area. Consequently, he has not adequately shown how his 
endeavor will benefit the regional or national economy. 
The Petitioner asserts thatl Iis susceptible to severe weather events due to climate change, and 
that by leveraging the strengths of I I energy sector, its diverse population, and its robust 
educational and cultural landscape, he envisions creating a blueprint for the entire nation. To achieve 
his goal of transforming! Iinto a sustainable city, he plans to collaborate with local influencers, 
content creators, media outlets, government agencies, businesses, non-profit organizations, and 
educational institutions, among others. However, it is insufficient to claim an endeavor has national 
importance or will create a broad impact without providing evidence to corroborate such claims. The 
Petitioner must support his assertions with relevant, probative, and credible evidence. See Matter of 
Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369, 376 (AAO 2010). 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 include adequate corroborating 
evidence to show what the Petitioner's proposed work entails and how that endeavor offers broader 
implications in his field of sustainability and business intelligence to U.S. societal welfare that rise to 
the level of national importance. Further, the Petitioner has not presented evidence of any potential 
benefits to the regional or national economies resulting from his undertaking that would reach the level 
of "substantial positive economic effects" contemplated by Dhanasar. Id. at 890. General assertions 
of economic impact are not sufficient to establish the actual potential economic impact of the proposed 
endeavor. 
Accordingly, we determine that the record does not demonstrate national importance of the 
Petitioner's proposed endeavor as required by the first prong of the Dhanasar precedent decision, and 
the Petitioner has not demonstrated eligibility for a national interest waiver. As the 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"). 
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. The appeal will be dismissed for the above stated reasons. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
4