dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Civil Engineering

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: JAN. 11, 2024 In Re: 29446682 
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 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 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 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 as 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. 
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). 
II. ANALYSIS 
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. The Petitioner's initial cover letter 
indicated: 
[The Petitioner's] endeavor is to provide structural and hydraulic design services, quality 
control of materials, and construction practices by developing, managing, and operating 
his own studio in the State of Florida. [The Petitioner] will manage soil and concrete in 
his laboratory to ensure the materials comply with all the State requirements and 
regulations. 
His endeavor is intimately aligned with U.S. government initiatives for affordable housing 
supply. The Petitioner's undertaking will create broad and significant social welfare 
benefits, generate employment, promote circulation of capital, and contribute to the fiscal 
coffers through payment of taxes. [The Petitioner] will recruit workers and train them in 
different activities, such as carpentry, flooring, piping installation, electrical installation, 
walls, and ceiling among others. His capacity to train others will help broaden the benefits 
of his project. 
In addition, the Petitioner provided a "Proposed Activities in the United States" stating: 
. . . [M]y intention is to create a studio that provides structural and hydraulic design 
services; quality control of materials and good construction practices; so I am setting up a 
soil and concrete laboratory, certainly complying with all State regulations. 
. . . I will obtain the necessary licenses to develop construction work in the different 
Counties and in the State of Florida; In addition to forming a construction company, which 
provides the aforementioned services, and to complement these I will install a laboratory 
to perform soil and strength soil and strength studies and testing of building materials 
within the city ofl lFlorida, that provides structural design services, quality control 
of building materials and good construction practices; certainly complying with a state 
regulations. 
In response to the Director's request for evidence, the Petitioner submitted a "Proposed Endeavor 
Statement" indicating: 
My proposed endeavor is to build on my extensive experience with construction, 
consulting and supervision of civil works, design of projects and execution of very 
important works, related to road infrastructure, hydrosanitary, hydraulic, structural, 
topography, soil laboratory and resistance of materials, building, to develop housing 
construction processes that mitigate the effects of flooding due to the presence of both 
hurricanes and tropical storms; In addition, the short-term implementation of a laboratory 
for studies of soils and construction materials in this city, which will allow us to identify 
2 
in a timely manner the bearing capacity of the soil and thus be able to apply in the design 
the loads for the houses; in order to help people to build and focus on caution avoiding the 
loss of their material goods, this applies to the construction of new homes; As for homes 
that are already a few years old under construction and that over time no longer meet 
standards of building codes, we can examine, identify and then be able to apply definitive 
solutions, such as reinforcing the perimeter of the foundation and raising the level of 
homes built in low-lying areas and prevent flooding. These technical and practical 
solutions can be achieved, to reduce costs for the purpose of paying for flood insurance, 
since improvements have been made in construction to protect against possible risks. 
The Director found the Petitioner established 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. On appeal, the Petitioner maintains the national importance of his 
proposed endeavor. 
In determining national importance, the relevant question is not the importance of the industry or 
profession in which the individual will work; instead, we focus on "the specific endeavor that the 
foreign national proposes to undertake." See Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. Although the Petitioner 
emphasizes his submission of evidence "fall[ing] within the aspect of being subject to national 
initiatives," as well as documentation on a wide range of topics such as real estate, affordable housing, 
civil engineering, senior housing, infrastructure, and construction, the Petitioner must demonstrate the 
national importance of his specific, proposed endeavor of his particular services through his business 
rather than the importance of any of the topics or the industry or the field. 2 In Dhanasar, we noted 
that "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. We also stated 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, for 
instance, may well be understood to have national importance." Id. at 890. 
To evaluate whether the Petitioner's proposed endeavor satisfies the national importance requirement, 
we look to evidence documenting the "potential prospective impact" of his work. The Petitioner did 
not offer specific information and evidence to corroborate his assertions that the prospective impact 
of his proposed endeavor 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. Here, the record does not show through 
supporting documentation how his specific services or business would stand to sufficiently extend 
beyond his prospective clients, to impact the industry or the U.S. economy more broadly at a level 
commensurate with national importance. For instance, the Petitioner contends that "the primary 
benefits lie in the improvements to the overall social fabric of the nation in providing real estate 
projects for the growing older population." However, the Petitioner did not establish how his services 
or business would have a broader impact on real estatle projers for seniors rather than limited to the 
projects involving the Petitioner or his business in the Florida area. 
2 The Petitioner's arguments and evidence relate more to the substantial merit of the proposed endeavor rather than the 
national importance aspect. 
3 
Finally, the Petitioner did not demonstrate how his proposed endeavor has significant potential to 
employ U.S. workers or otherwise offers substantial positive economic effects for our nation. 
Although the Petitioner asserts the record "contained ample documentation to corroborate the 
economic benefits of the Petitioner's proposed endeavor by and through the personal statements" and 
[b]oth of these documents contained ample arguments supported by objective documentary evidence 
to support the assertions therein," the personal statements do not discuss how his particular endeavor 
would result in substantial economic benefits. Rather, the personal statements reference overall 
figures, such as "the real estate sector is projected to amount to US $3 7. 000bn in 2022." The Petitioner 
does not claim or make any arguments relating to how his proposed endeavor would substantially 
benefit the real estate sector. For all these reasons, the record does not establish that, beyond the 
limited benefits provided to his prospective clients, the Petitioner's proposed endeavor has broader 
implications rising to the level of having national importance or that it would offer substantial positive 
economic effects. 
Because the documentation in the record does not establish the national importance of his 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 his eligibility under the second 
and third prongs outlined in Dhanasar, therefore, would serve no meaningful purpose. 3 
III. CONCLUSION 
As the Petitioner has not met the 
requisite first prong ofthe Dhanasar analytical framework, we conclude 
he 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. 
3 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). 
4