dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Business Management

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: FEB. 9, 2024 In Re: 29853411 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, a commercial manager, seeks classification under the employment-based, second­
preference (EB-2) immigrant visa category and a waiver of the category's job-offer requirement. See 
Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 203(b )(2)(B)(i), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b )(2)(B)(i). U.S. 
Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has discretion to excuse a job offer in this category -
and thus a related requirement for certification from the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) - if a 
petitioner demonstrates that a waiver of these U.S.-worker protections would be "in the national 
interest." Id. 
The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the petition. The Director concluded that the 
Petitioner did not demonstrate the merits of her national interest waiver request. On appeal, the 
Petitioner contends that the Director made "numerous erroneous conclusions of both law and fact." 
She asserts that, contrary to the Director's decision: her proposed U.S. work has "national 
importance;" she is "well positioned" to advance the endeavor; and, on balance, a waiver would benefit 
the United States. 
The Petitioner bears the burden of demonstrating eligibility for the requested benefit by a 
preponderance of the evidence. Matter of Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369, 375-76 (AAO 2010). 
Exercising de novo appellate review, see Matter of Christo 's, Inc., 26 I&N Dec. 537, 537 n.2 (AAO 
2015), we conclude that she has not established the claimed national importance of her proposed 
endeavor. We will therefore dismiss the appeal. 
I. LAW 
To establish eligibility for national interest waivers, petlt10ners must first demonstrate their 
qualifications for the EB-2 category, either as members of the professions holding "advanced degrees" 
or noncitizens of "exceptional ability" in the sciences, arts, or business. Section 203(b )(2)(A) of the 
Act. To protect the jobs of U.S. workers, this category usually requires prospective employers to offer 
noncitizens jobs and to obtain DOL certifications to permanently employ the individuals in the 
country. See section 212(a)(5)(D) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(5)(D). To avoid the job offer/labor 
certification requirements, petitioners must demonstrate that waivers of the U.S.-worker protections 
would be in the national interest. Section 203(b)(2)(B)(i) of the Act. 
Neither the Act nor regulations define the term "national interest." So, to adjudicate these waiver 
requests, we have established a framework. See Matter ofDhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. 884, 889-91 (AAO 
2016). If otherwise qualified as advanced degree professionals or noncitizens of exceptional ability, 
petitioners may warrant waivers of the job-offer/labor certification requirements if they demonstrate 
that: 
• Their proposed U.S. work has "substantial merit" and "national importance;" 
• They are "well positioned" to advance their intended endeavors; and 
• On balance, waivers of the job-offer/labor certification requirements would benefit the United 
States. 
Id. 
II. ANALYSIS 
A. The Proposed Endeavor 
The record shows 
that a university in the Petitioner's home country of Brazil awarded her a bachelor's 
degree in social communication, with a major in public relations. Thereafter, a technology company 
in Brazil employed her for about 17 years, most recently as a customer care manager. 
The Petitioner came to the United States in 2022. She proposes to provide commercial management 
services to U.S. businesses, advising them in such areas as: customer relationships; strategic planning; 
team management; and "endomarketing," which she says focuses on internal communications and 
employee engagement. To continue providing commercial management services, she states that she 
would either form her own business or work for an established U.S. company. 
B. EB-2 Eligibility 
The record supports the Director's conclusion that the Petitioner qualifies for the EB-2 category as an 
advanced degree professional. She submitted evidence that her Brazilian degree equates to a U.S. 
bachelor's degree and that she gained more than five years of post-baccalaureate experience in the 
business field. See 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2) (defining the term "advanced degree" to include a "United 
States baccalaureate degree or a foreign equivalent degree followed by at least five years of 
progressive experience in the specialty"). 
C. Substantial Merit 
A proposed endeavor may have substantial merit whether it "has the potential to create a significant 
economic impact" or it relates to "research, pure science, and the furtherance of human knowledge." 
Matter ofDhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. 
The Petitioner submitted evidence that her commercial management services could help U.S. 
businesses generate more revenues and jobs. We therefore also agree with the Director that the 
Petitioner's proposal has substantial merit. 
2 
D. National Importance 
In determining whether a proposed endeavor has national importance, USCIS must focus on the 
particular venture, specifically on its "potential prospective impact." Matter of Dhanasar, 26 I&N 
Dec. at 889. "An undertaking may have national importance, for example, 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. A nationally important venture may even focus 
on only one geographic area of the United States. Id. at 889-90. "An 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. 
The Director found insufficient evidence that the Petitioner's proposed work would significantly 
impact the U.S. economy or generate a significant number of jobs. The Director also found that the 
Petitioner had not demonstrated that her proposed endeavor would broadly affect her field, enhance 
societal welfare, or provide cultural or artistic enrichment. 
On appeal, the Petitioner states that, by improving U.S. businesses' efficiency and competitiveness, 
her commercial management services would help generate more revenues and jobs. She states that 
she would teach businesses to understand and cater to their customers' needs and expectations, leading 
to professional development opportunities and job creation. 
The Petitioner also contends that her "innovative and unique techniques will revolutionize the field 
and have far-reaching effects on the economy, workforce, business landscape, and societal welfare." 
She states: "By placing customers at the center of business operations, [she] will reshape the way 
businesses interact with customers, leading to a more prosperous and customer-centric landscape in 
the United States." She states that her commercial management services would provide many other 
benefits to U.S. businesses, including: improving their access to financing by providing their leaders 
with proper data; increasing their understanding of market trends; and helping them to better manage 
customer relations. 
The record, however, does not sufficiently establish that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor has 
national importance. She has not demonstrated that the scope of her commercial management services 
would be broad enough to affect the national economy. If she decides to establish her own company, 
the record lacks a business plan providing her business's projected revenues and its number of 
employees and customers. The Petitioner also has not established that her business would support an 
economically depressed area. If the Petitioner opts to work for an established U.S. company, she has 
not indicated how many businesses she would serve. Further, although the Petitioner claims that she 
would "revolutionize" the commercial management field, she has not demonstrated that her services 
or customer-centric techniques would introduce advancements to the field. 
The Petitioner provided expert opinion letters from two U.S. university professors: an associate 
professor of marketing and a business professor. Both letters state that the Petitioner's proposed work 
has national importance because her commercial management services would financially strengthen 
U.S. businesses, creating jobs and increasing tax revenues. 
3 
We recognize the professors as experts in their fields. But they are not experts in determining national 
importance in waiver adjudications. See Matter ofA-, 7 I&N Dec. 657, 659-60 (Ass't. Comm'r 1958) 
(stating that expert testimony "may not be accepted as complete proof that the basic requirements [of 
a petition or application] have been met"). Neither expert explains how the Petitioner's particular 
proposed endeavor has national importance. See Matter ofDhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889 ('The first 
prong, substantial merit and national importance, focuses on the spec[fic endeavor that the foreign 
national proposes to undertake.") ( emphasis added). A particular proposed undertaking must have at 
least "national ... implications" for the economy or the relevant field. Id. The Petitioner's experts 
state that her proposed work would positively benefit the U.S. economy. But they do not explain how 
her specific proposal - by itself - has national implications for the economy or her field. 
As the Director found, the Petitioner's proposed endeavor resembles one we encountered in Dhanasar. 
There, the petitioner proposed teaching courses to U.S. university students in science, technology, 
engineering, and mathematics (STEM) disciplines. Matter of Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 893. We 
agreed that the proposal had substantial merit. Id. But we concluded that the petitioner did not 
demonstrate that his proposed teaching of a limited number of students would "more broadly" affect 
the U.S. STEM education field. Id. 
Similarly, the Petitioner's proposed commercial management services have substantial merit. But, 
like the petitioner in Dhanasar, she has not demonstrated that her particular activities would "more 
broadly" affect the U.S. economy or the commercial management field. 
The Petitioner has not demonstrated that her proposed U.S. endeavor has national importance. Thus, 
under the Dhanasar framework, she does not qualify for a national interest waiver. Therefore, because 
the petition lacks a job offer and a labor certification, we cannot approve the filing. 
E. Other Issues 
Our conclusion regarding the claimed national importance of the Petitioner's proposed endeavor 
resolves this appeal. We therefore decline to reach and hereby reserve her appellate arguments 
regarding her positioning to advance her proposed venture and the claimed benefits of a waiver to the 
United States. See INS v. Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. 24, 25 (1976) (stating that agencies need not make 
"purely advisory findings" on issues unnecessary to their ultimate decisions); see also Matter ofL-A­
C-, 26 I&N Dec. 516, 526 n.7 (BIA 2015) (declining to reach alternate issues on appeal where an 
applicant did not otherwise qualify for relief). 
III. CONCLUSION 
The Petitioner has not demonstrated that her proposed U.S. endeavor has national importance. We 
will therefore affirm the petition's denial. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
4