dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Chemical Engineering

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
MATTER OF J-D-L-
APPEAL OF TEXAS SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: MAY 4, 2017 
PETITION: FORM 1-140, IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER 
The Petitioner, a chemical engineer, seeks second preference immigrant classification as a member 
of the professions holding an advanced degree, as well as a national interest waiver of the job offer 
requirement attached to this EB-2 classification. See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) 
section 203(b)(2), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(2). After a petitioner has established eligibility for EB-2 
classification, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) may, as matter of discretion, 
grant a national interest waiver if the petitioner demonstrates: (1) that the foreign national's 
proposed endeavor has both substantial merit and national importance; (2) that the foreign national is 
well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor; and (3) that, on balance, it would be beneficial to 
the United States to waive the requirements of ajob offer and thus of a labor certification. Matter of 
Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. 884 (AAO 2016). 
The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien 
Worker, finding that the Petitioner qualified for classification as a member of the professions 
holding an advanced degree, but that he had not established that a waiver of a job offer, and thus of a 
labor certification 1 would be in the national interest. The matter is now before us on appeal. 
With the appeal, the Petitioner submits additional documentation and contends that he is eligible for 
a national interest waiver. In February 2017, we issued a request for evidence (RFE) asking the 
Petitioner to provide evidence satisfying the three-part framework set forth in Dhanasar. The 
Petitioner did not respond to our request. 
1 
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. Because this classification 
requires that the individual's services be sought by a U.S. employer, a separate showing is required 
to establish that a waiver of the job offer requirement is in the national interest. 
Matter of J-D-L-
Section 203(b) ofthe Act sets out this sequential framework: 
(2) Aliens who are members of the professions holding advanced degrees or aliens of 
exceptional ability. -
(A) In general. -Visas shall be made available ... to qualified immigrants who 
are members of the professions holding advanced degrees or their equivalent or 
who because of their exceptional ability in the sciences, arts, or business, will 
substantially benefit prospectively the national economy, cultural or educational 
interests, or welfare of the United States, and whose services in the sciences, arts, 
professions, or business are sought by an employer in the United States. 
(B) Waiver ofjob offer-
(i) National interest waiver. ... [T]he Attorney General may, when the 
Attorney General deems it to be in the national interest, waive the 
requirements of subparagraph (A) that an alien's services in the sciences, arts, 
professions, or business be sought by an employer in the United States. 
While neither the statute nor the pertinent regulations define the term "national interest," we recently 
set forth a new framework for adjudicating national interest waiver petitions. See Dhanasar, 26 I&N 
Dec. 884.1 Dhanasar clarifies that, after EB-2 eligibility as an advanced degree professional or 
individual of exceptional ability has been established, USCIS may grant a national interest waiver if 
the petitioner demonstrates by a preponderance of the evidence: ( 1) that the foreign national's 
proposed endeavor has both substantial merit and national importance; (2) that the foreign national is 
well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor; and (3) that, on balance, it would be beneficial to 
theUnited States to waive the requirements of a job offer and thus of a labor certification. If these 
three elements are satisfied, USCIS may approve the national interest waiver as a matter of 
discretion. 
The first prong, substantial merit and national importance, focuses on the specific endeavor that the 
foreign national 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. 
The second prong shifts the focus from the proposed endeavor to the foreign national. To determine 
whether he or she is well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor, we consider factors 
including, but not limited to: the individual's education, skills, knowledge and record of success in 
related or similar efforts; a model or plan for future activities; any progress towards achieving the 
1 In announcing this new framework, we vacated our prior precedent decision, Matter of New York State Department of 
Transportation, 22 I&N Dec. 215 (Act. Assoc. Comm'r 1998) (NYSD07). 
2 
Matter of J-D-L-
proposed endeavor; and the interest of potential customers, users, investors, or other relevant entities 
or individuals. 
The third prong requires the petitioner to demonstrate that; on balance, it would be beneficial to the 
United States to waive the requirements of a job offer and thus of a labor certification. In 
performing this analysis, USC IS may evaluate factors such as: whether, in light of the nature of the 
foreign national's qualifications or the proposed endeavor, it would be impractical either for the 
foreign national· to secure a job offer or for the petitioner to obtain a labor certification; whether, 
even assuming that other qualified U.S.~ workers are available, the United States would still benefit 
from the foreign national's contributions; and whether the national interest in the foreign national's 
contributions is sufficiently urgent to warrant forgoing the labor certification process. In each case, 
the factor(s) considered must, taken together, indicate that on balance, it would be beneficial to the 
United Stat~s to waive the requirements of a job offer and thus of a labor certification.2 
II. ANALYSIS 
The record reflects that the Petitioner holds the foreign equivalent of a U.S. baccalaureate degree in 
chemical engineering and has progressive post-baccalaureate experience in that specialty equivalent 
to an advanced degree under the regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(i)(B). Accordingly, the Director 
found that the Petitioner qualified as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree. The sole 
issue to be determined is whether the Petitioner has established that a waiver of the requirement of a 
job offer, and thus a labor certification, would be in the national interest. 
A. Appeal Abandoned 
We may summarily dismiss an appeal if the Petitioner does not respond to our RFE. The regulation 
provides, in pertinent part: · 
If the petitioner or applicant fails to respond to a request for evidence or to a notice of 
intent to deny by the required date, the benefit request may be summarily denied as 
abandoned, denied based on the record, or denied for both reasons. 
8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(13)(i). Our RFE specifically informed the Petitioner that "[w]e may dismiss 
your appeal if we do not receive your response to this RFE within 48 days of the date on the cover 
letter. This time period includes 3 days added for service by mail." (Emphasis in original.) To 
date, more than 48 days have\ lapsed, and we have yet to receive a response from the Petitioner on 
issues we discussed in the RFE. As such, we will summarily dismiss the appeal as abandoned 
pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(l3)(i). 
2 See Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 888-91, for elaboration on these three prongs. 
3 
.
Matter of J-D-L-
B. Eligibility Under the Dhanasar Framework 
In the alternative, we find that the Petitioner has not demonstrated that he satisfies the requirements 
set forth in Dhanasar. In part 6 of the Form I-140, the Petitioner identified his job title as "Chemical 
Engineer." In a letter accompanying the petition, he stated that he planned to work in the United 
States as a chemical engineer and listed multiple industries that offer job opportunities in his field. 
Additionally, the Petitioner indicated that "[c]hemical engineering is used extensively in producing 
energy and crude oil fuel products such as diesel, gasoline, kerosene and Liquefied Petroleum Gas" 
and that he previously "developed computer algorithm monitoring tools that are used by the 
' in South Africa. According to Form ETA Form 9089, Application for Permanent 
Employment Certification, provided in response to the Director's March 2016 RFE, the Petitioner 
most recently worked from 2007 to 2014 as a process engineer for the 
On appeal, the Petitioner asserts that "chemical engineering job recruiters across the United States 
frequently contact me" and that "I often get 3 telephone interviews every week from these 
recruiters," but he does not identify the specific endeavor that he will undertake.3 His appellate 
submission includes a second letter from senior scientist at in 
South Africa, discussing his research work at the 
during his undergraduate studies. notes that the Petitioner conducted a research 
project aimed at investigating and developing "a cleaning strategy for fouled filter sand that was 
used in full-scale sand filters at the waterworks. " In addition, indicates that the 
Petitioner "published his research and experiment results which are still used by ' and 
that his research "was innovative and ground breaking." The Petitioner has not clarified whether he 
intends to continue performing and publishing research in this area. Nor does the evidence 
demonstrate a record of success or progress in his field, or a degree of interest in his work from 
relevant parties, that rises to the level of rendering him well positioned to advance such an endeavor . 
The record does not reflect, for instance, that the Petitioner's undergraduate work has been utilized 
by others in the water treatment industry, has affected filtration practices in facilities beyond the 
has generated substantial positive discourse in the field, or has 
garnered a significant number of independent citations. 
In our RFE, we asked the Petitioner to provide updated information and evidence regarding his 
current employment and plans for future work in his field. As the Petitioner did not respond to our 
request, he has not demonstrated that he is eligible for a national interest waiver. Specifically, the 
record does not clearly .articulate a proposed endeavor such that we are able to determine, without 
additional information and evidence, that the Petitioner's proposed work will have both substantial 
merit and national importance and that he . is well positioned to advance his proposed endeavor. 
3 As the Petitioner has applied for a waiver of the job offer requirement , he need not have a job offer from a specific 
employer . Nevertheless, information about the nature of his proposed endeavor is necessary for us to determine whether 
it has substantial merit and national importance, and whether he is well positioned to advance the endeavor. 
4 
Matter of J:.D-L-
Furthermore, the Petitioner has not established that, on balance, it would be beneficial to the United 
States to waive the requirements of a job offer and thus of a labor certification. 
III. CONCLUSION 
As the Petitioner did not respond to our RFE seeking evidence to establish eligibility, the appeal is 
considered abandoned. In addition, as the Petitioner has not met the requisite three prongs set forth in 
the Dhanasar analytical :framework, we find that he has not established eligibility for or otherwise 
merits a national interest waiver as a matter of discretion. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
Cite as Matter of J-D-L-, ID# 287311 (AAO May 4, 2017) 
5