dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Clean Energy

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date : WL. 17, 2023 In Re: 26929349 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, an investment associate in the field of clean energy, seeks classification as a member 
of the professions holding an advanced degree. Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 
203(b )(2), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b )(2). The Petitioner also seeks a national interest waiver of the job offer 
requirement that is attached to this EB-2 immigrant classification. Section 203(b)(2)(i) of the Act. 
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) may grant this discretionary waiver of the 
required job offer, and thus of a labor certification, when it is in the national interest to do so. 
The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the petition, concluding that although the Petitioner 
qualified as an advanced degree professional, she had not established that a waiver of the required job 
offer, and thus of the labor certification, would be in the national interest. 1 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 l&N Dec. 369, 375-76 (AAO 2010). We review the questions in this matter 
de novo . Matter ofChristo 's, Inc., 26 I&N Dec. 537,537 n.2 (AAO 2015) . Upon de novo review, we 
will dismiss the appeal. 
If a petitioner demonstrates eligibility for the underlying EB-2 classification, they must then establish 
that they merit 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 of Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. 884, 889 (AAO 2016), provides the 
framework for adjudicating national interest waiver petitions. Dhanasar states that U.S. Citizenship 
1 An advanced degree is any United States academic or professional degree or a foreign equivalent degree above that of a 
bachelor's degree. A United States bachelor 's degree or foreign equivalent degree followed by five years of progressive 
experience in the specialty is the equivalent of a master's degree. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2). 
Although the Director did not address the Petitioner 's eligibility for the requested EB-2 classification in the decision, they 
did determine that she "qualifies as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree" in the request for evidence 
(RFE). The Petitioner has a master's degree in international affairs from! !University. 
and Immigration Services (USCIS) may, as matter of discretion 2, 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. 
In her professional plan, the Petitioner explained that her proposed endeavor would be to work in the 
United States as an investment associate in the field of clean energy, where she would offer "consulting 
services to manage, structure, and deploy capital to derisk [sic] clean energy investments with targeted 
socio-economic benefits for the community." She farther stated that she intends to: 
[P]rovide services focusing on pricing community solar assets, including evaluating the 
risks associated with portfolio acquisition through extensive financial modeling, 
negotiating with US-based solar developer companies who build and operate the solar 
sites, and identifying opportunities to secure long-term revenue streams while creating 
value for the community by making clean energy more affordable. 
In addition, the Petitioner submitted evidence including an opinion letter from a professor at the 
University I I reference letters, and articles regarding clean energy and sustainability. 3 The 
articles discuss the importance of sustainability and the increase in companies adopting a more 
sustainable business model. Moreover, the opinion letter explains the various U.S. government 
programs that have been established to increase renewable energy and green investments in the United 
States. The record therefore shows that the Petitioner's proposed work as an investment associate in 
the field of clean energy has substantial merit. 
On appeal, the Petitioner contends that the Director erred in concluding that she did not establish that 
her proposed endeavor is of national importance. 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. In Dhanasar, we farther 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 her work. Although the 
Petitioner's professional plan states that her endeavor "to increase the use of solar power will protect 
and improve the environment, spur business growth, and increase tax revenue for the economy," the 
2 See also Poursina v. USCIS, 936 F.3d 868 (9th Cir. 2019) (finding USCTS' decision to grant or deny a national interest 
waiver to be discretionary in nature). 
3 While we do not discuss every piece of evidence individually, we have reviewed and considered each document 
submitted. 
2 
record does not show through supporting documentation how her proposed endeavor to provide clean 
energy investment consulting services stands to sufficiently extend beyond its prospective clients, to 
impact the industry or the U.S. economy more broadly at a level commensurate with national 
importance. In Dhanasar, we determined that 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. 
In addition, the Petitioner stresses her "10 years of work experience in clean energy." However, the 
Petitioner's experience, skills, expertise, 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. 
Furthermore, the Petitioner has not demonstrated that the specific endeavor she proposes to undertake 
has significant potential to employ U.S. workers or otherwise offers substantial positive economic 
effects for our nation. Without sufficient information or evidence regarding any projected U.S. 
economic impact or job creation directly attributable to her future work, the record does not show that 
benefits to the U.S. regional or national economy resulting from the Petitioner's clean energy 
investment consulting services would reach the level of "substantial positive economic effects" 
contemplated by Dhanasar. Id. at 890. Accordingly, the Petitioner's proposed work does not meet 
the first prong of the Dhanasar framework. 
Because the Petitioner has not established eligibility under the first prong of the Dhanasar test, we 
need not address her eligibility under the remaining prongs, and we hereby reserve them. 4 The burden 
of proof is on the Petitioner to establish that she meets each eligibility requirement of the benefit 
sought by a preponderance of the evidence. Matter of Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. at 375-376. The 
Petitioner has not done so here and, therefore, we conclude that she has not established eligibility for 
a national interest waiver as a matter of discretion. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
4 See INS v. Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. 24, 25 (1976) ("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 l&N Dec. 516, 526 n.7 (BIA 
2015) ( declining to reach alternative issues on appeal where an applicant is otherwise ineligible). 
3