dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Business Management

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: FEB. 6, 2024 In Re: 29829373 
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 the underlying immigrant classification and 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 Christo 's, Inc., 26 l&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 I&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 their 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. At initial filing, the 
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). 
Petitioner provided a cover letter in a foreign language, which was neither translated nor certified. 
Any document in a foreign language must be accompanied by a foll English language translation. 8 
C.F.R. § 102.2(b )(3). The translator must certify that the English language translation is complete and 
accurate, and that the translator is competent to translate from the foreign language into English. Id. 
In response to the Director's request for evidence, the Petitioner claimed that her "knowledge and 
work experiences can add value to large companies," and she has "had the opportunity to explore a 
number of companies, and [ she has] been able to see that many times they lack a professional who has 
the knowledge and experience to deal with the staff and create a pleasant and productive work 
environment." The Petitioner also listed several objectives, including to "stand out within a company 
with long-term perspectives," "contribute to keeping the company's client portfolio healthy," "provide 
good logistics management and the correct supply of raw materials in company warehouses," 
"maintain an attitude of cultural positivity," and "maintain a high standard in inspections of quality 
control." In addition, the Petitioner provided two job offer letters for a warehouse general manager 
and a plant safety and quality control manager. 
The Director concluded the Petitioner demonstrated the proposed endeavor's substantial merit but not its 
national importance. Regarding substantial merit, the endeavor's merits 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. 
In determining national importance, "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. Further, "[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 
Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 890. 
Moreover, to evaluate whether the Petitioner's proposed endeavor satisfies the national importance 
requirement, we look to evidence documenting the "potential prospective impact" of her work. 
Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. Here, the Petitioner did not demonstrate how her proposed endeavor 
of working in a managerial capacity for a warehouse, plant, or similar company 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. Likewise, the record does not show through supporting 
documentation how her managerial services stands to sufficiently extend beyond her prospective 
employer, to impact the industry or the U.S. economy more broadly at a level commensurate with 
national importance. 
In addition, the Petitioner repeatedly emphasizes her knowledge and experience. 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 she proposes to undertake has national importance under 
Dhanasar's first prong. 
2 
Finally, the Petitioner did not show how her proposed endeavor has significant potential to employ 
U.S. workers or otherwise offers substantial positive economic effects for our nation. Without credible 
evidence regarding any projected U.S. economic impact or job creation attributable to her future work, 
the record does not demonstrate any benefits to the U.S. regional or national economy resulting from 
the Petitioner's managerial work would reach the level of "substantial positive economic effects" as 
contemplated by Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 890. 
Because the documentation in the record does not establish the national importance of her 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 her eligibility under the second 
and third prongs outlined in Dhanasar, therefore, would serve no meaningful purpose. We also reserve 
a determination on the Petitioner's eligibility for the underlying immigrant classification. 2 
III. CONCLUSION 
As the Petitioner has not met the 
requisite first prong ofthe Dhanasar analytical framework, we conclude 
that she 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. 
2 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