dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Business Management

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: AUG. 26, 2024 In Re: 33360668 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, a business professional, seeks employment-based second preference (EB-2) immigrant 
classification as an advanced degree professional, 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 the Petitioner did not 
establish that a waiver of the required job offer and the labor certification would be in the national 
interest. The matter is now before us on appeal pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 103.3. 1 
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 I&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 U.S. academic or professional degree or a foreign equivalent degree above 
that of a bachelor's degree. 2 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2). A U.S. bachelor's degree or a foreign equivalent 
degree followed by five years of progressive experience in the specialty is the equivalent of a master's 
degree. Id. 
1 A petitioner must appeal an unfavorable decision within 33 calendar days of the date it was mailed. 8 C.F.R. 
§ 103.3(a)(2)(i) and 103.8(b). The Petitioner's Form I-290B was received 78 days after the required period. However, the 
Petitioner asserts he did not timely receive the Director's decision. Because the Director's decision lacked critical address 
information (block number, zip code, and country), we accept the Petitioner's assertion as true, and will adjudicate the 
appeal as if it has timely arrived. 
2 Profession shall include, but not be limited to, architects, engineers, lawyers, physicians, surgeons, and teachers in 
elementary or secondary schools, colleges, academics, or seminaries. Section 10 I ( a)(32) of the Act. 
Once a petitioner demonstrates eligibility for the underlying classification, the petitioner must then 
establish eligibility for 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 ofDhanasar, 26 T&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 a 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 
The Petitioner filed this petition on September 15, 2023. After analyzing the initial evidence, the 
Director issued a request for evidence (RFE) on September 20, 2023, noting the deficiencies in the 
record, to which the Petitioner timely responded on December 12, 2023. The Director denied the 
petition concluding that although the Petitioner is eligible for EB-2 classification as an advanced 
degree professional, 4 he did not establish that a waiver of the job offer, and labor certification 
requirement, is in the national interest because he did not meet any of the three Dhanasar prongs. 
As stated above, a petitioner must establish that they meet all three prongs of the Dhanasar framework 
to obtain a national interest waiver. If even one of the prongs is not established, a petitioner is 
ineligible for this waiver. Accordingly, we will analyze the Petitioner's evidence under prong one 
and, as explained below, because he has not established his eligibility under that prong, we decline to 
reach and hereby reserve the Petitioner's arguments regarding the second and third prongs of the 
Dhanasar framework. See INS v. Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. 24, 25 (1976) (noting 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 of L-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). 
A. Prong One: Substantial Merit and National Importance of the Proposed Endeavor 
The first Dhanasar prong, substantial merit and national importance, focuses on the specific endeavor 
that the individual proposes to undertake and its "potential prospective impact." 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. The term "endeavor" is more 
specific than the general occupation; a petitioner should offer details not only as to what the occupation 
normally involves, but what types of work the person proposes to undertake specifically within that 
3 See 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 is discretionary 
in nature). 
4 We agree with the Director's assessment of the Petitioner's credentials, and that he has established he is an advanced 
degree professional. 
2 
occupation. See generally 6 USCIS Policy Manual F.5(D)(l), https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual. 
For example, while engineering is an occupation, the explanation of the proposed endeavor should 
describe the specific projects and goals, or the areas of engineering in which the person will work, 
rather than simply listing the duties and responsibilities of an engineer. Id. As such, we will first 
identify the Petitioner's endeavor as shown in the record. Then, we will evaluate the Petitioner's 
evidence in support of the endeavor's substantial merit and national importance. 
In evaluating the Petitioner's proposed endeavor, we consider his Form I-140, 2023 business plan, and 
appeal statement in which he explains that he will work as a business management consultant, and 
chief operating officer (general manager) of his own enterprise. The focus of his enterprise will be to 
support established U.S. manufacturing companies and startups to reach their full potential in 
international markets, with a focus on expanding the "Made in the USA" or "Brand of USA" footprint 
for telecommunications products in the Middle East, North Africa, Southeast Asia, and Southwest 
Asia. He asserts that his sales, consulting, supply chain management, and business experience together 
with his vast network of contacts in those regions of the world, will challenge the dominance of 
Chinese made products, and make significant contributions to the economic growth and vitality of the 
U.S. manufacturers and startups who will produce the telecommunication products he intends to sell. 
As such, based on the totality of the relevant evidence, we agree with the Director that the Petitioner 
has established, by a preponderance of the evidence, that his proposed endeavor has substantial merit. 
Because the endeavor has substantial merit, we tum to whether the proposed endeavor is of national 
importance, as contemplated by Dhanasar. 
On appeal, the Petitioner asserts the Director erred and misconstrued or misunderstood the evidence 
he presented to establish his proposed endeavor's national importance and overlooked the broader 
implications and potential economic effects of his proposed endeavor. Specifically, the Petitioner 
asserts the Director did not consider the economic projections, and the substantial impacts he 
highlighted in his business plan. He maintains the national importance of his endeavor stems from its 
"creation of employment opportunities ... reduction in unemployment rates and fostering economic 
stability" as well as the "innovation and technological advancements, [which] can enhance the nation's 
global competitiveness," and the "potential for exports and trade [ which would] open up new revenue 
streams and contribut[ e] to a favorable trade balance." He further maintains that because "healthy 
competition into a market can drive efficiencies, benefitting consumers, and fueling overall economic 
growth," his endeavor is of national importance. The Petitioner lists the additional impacts to stem 
from his proposed endeavor as follows: economic diversity and resilience, which stems from a thriving 
entrepreneurial venture; increased tax revenues, which support public services and government 
initiatives; national security by supporting and increasing the U.S. 's domestic supply chain of 
manufacturers; and multiple economic benefits from supporting startups, such as innovation, a 
healthier entrepreneurial ecosystem, which attracts skilled workers from around the world, and 
community development. He asserts all these impacts are sufficiently broad to meet Dhanasar 's 
national importance standard. 
We acknowledge the Petitioner's assertion that he will "recruit 12 new full-time jobs initially ... [and] 
potentially recruit a total of 41 employees excluding [himself]" and will generate a total revenue of 
$6,180,013 by his enterprise's fifth year of operation. He asserts that his expansion of the "Made in 
the USA" brand campaign will lead to even more job creation. In addition, because I I Texas 
is an economically depressed area, he asserts his business will enhance economic opportunities there, 
3 
which is an additional factor sufficient to establish national importance under Dhanasar because the 
decision states 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 ... may well be 
understood to have national importance." Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 890. We acknowledge his 
assertion that in time, the economic success of his endeavor will lead to more monetary investments, 
and greater prosperity in the regional economy of I I However, even assuming all the 
projections in the business plan are accurate and attained, and we consider the ripple effects of hiring 
41 workers in an economically depressed area, the record lacks evidence demonstrating the projections 
rise to the level of national importance. See Matter of Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. at 375-76 (standing 
for the proposition that assertions must be supported with relevant, credible, and probative evidence). 
As contemplated by Dhanasar, we examine the record to determine if there is sufficient evidence to 
conclude the Petitioner's "undertaking may have national importance ... because it has national or 
even global implications within a particular field, such as those resulting from certain improved 
manufacturing processes or medical advances." Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 893. Here, the Petitioner 
has not submitted evidence to support the conclusion that his endeavor will impact the fields of sales, 
marketing, customer relations, telecommunications, information technology, imaging, and electronics 
at a level commensurate with national importance. 5 Matter ofChawathe, 25 I&N Dec. at 375-76. On 
appeal, the Petitioner asserts that the Director overlooked the "core objective" of his endeavor, which 
is "to provide beneficial services to underperforming start-ups, mobile device manufacturers, and U.S. 
policymakers who are not fully capitalizing on the strength of the "Brand of USA" in international 
markets." Moreover, in his RFE response, the Petitioner emphasized the importance of his proposed 
endeavor to these fields, particularly in terms of innovation, increased exports and resulting job 
creation as well as the "Made in the USA" brand campaign he seeks to implement, which he asserts 
aligns with the Biden Administration's initiatives to promote economic growth. We acknowledge the 
Petitioner's assertions; however, they lack probative evidence to support them. Id. 
As contemplated by Dhanasar, we examined the record to determine if there is sufficient evidence to 
conclude the Petitioner's "undertaking may have national importance ... 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 893. Here, we find no evidence to support such 
a conclusion. Matter ofChawathe, 25 I&N Dec. at 375-76. 
Many of the Petitioner's assertions speak to the substantial merit of his endeavor, however they do not 
establish its national importance. Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 893. For example, in Dhanasar, we 
determined that while proposed classroom teaching activities in STEM may have substantial merit in 
relation to U.S. educational interests, such activities, by themselves, generally are not indicative of an 
impact in the field of STEM education more broadly, and therefore generally would not establish their 
national importance. Id. Similarly, here, while the Petitioner's professional services may be highly 
beneficial to his clients and partners, this is not indicative of a broader impact on the fields of sales, 
business consulting, telecommunications, information technology, imaging, and electronics, in 
general. 
5 The Petitioner correctly pointed out that the Director misstated the field of his endeavor as video and audio production. 
Notwithstanding this misstatement, because we agree with the Director's determination that the national importance of his 
proposed endeavor is not based on the importance of the field or industry in which the endeavor will take place, we will 
not remand the matter for this reason. See Dhanasar, 26 l&N Dec. at 889. 
4 
Finally, we acknowledge the Petitioner appears to be a highly skilled and accomplished professional. 
However, as the Director pointed out, the first prong generally does not consider the Petitioner's 
professional qualifications, work experience, business partnerships, or letters of support from 
investors, instead, those factors are considered in prong two, where we analyze whether the Petitioner 
is well-positioned to carry out his endeavor. See Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 890. Moreover, the 
Director explained that a shortage of sales professionals would not be sufficient to establish national 
importance. This is because the Department of Labor addresses labor shortages through the labor 
certification process. Finally, the Director noted that the Petitioner's assertions with respect to the 
information technology sector's importance does not render his endeavor nationally important under 
the Dhanasar framework. The Petitioner's business plan relies on the information technology sector's 
contribution to the U.S. gross domestic product to assert his endeavor's national importance. 
However, as the Director correctly pointed out, the Petitioner's assertions relate to the importance of 
the field, and not to his proposed endeavor. As such, we agree with the Director's determination on 
these matters. 
III. CONCLUSION 
As the Petitioner has not met the requisite first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework, 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. 
5