dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Coaching

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 20009106 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date : DEC . 10, 2021 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker (Advanced Degree, Exceptional Ability, National 
Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, al I coach, seeks second preference immigrant classification as a member of 
the professions holding an advanced degree and as an individual of exceptional ability, 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). 
The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the Petitioner did not 
qualify for classification a member of the professions with an advanced degree or as an individual of 
exceptional ability, and that he had not had not established that a waiver of the required job offer, and 
thus of the labor certification, would be in the national interest. 
On appeal, the Petitioner submits a brief asserting that he is eligible for EB-2 visa classification and a 
national interest waiver. 
In these proceedings, it is the petitioner's burden to establish eligibility for the immigration benefit 
sought. Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361. 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. 
Section 203(b) of the 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 set forth 
a framework for adjudicating national interest waiver petitions in the precedent decision Matter of 
Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. 884 (AAO 2016). Dhanasar states that after a petitioner has established 
eligibility for EB-2 classification, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) may, as matter 
of discretion 1, 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 a job offer and thus of a labor certification. 
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 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, USCIS 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 
1 See also Poursina v. USC1S. No. 17-16579, 2019 WL 4051593 (Aug. 28, 2019) (finding USCIS' decision to grant or 
deny a national interest waiver to be discretionary in nature). 
2 
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 States 
to waive the requirements of a job offer and thus of a labor certification. 2 
II. ANALYSIS 
The Petitioner qualifies as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree. 3 The remaining 
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. For the reasons discussed below, 
we agree with the Director that the Petitioner has not sufficiently demonstrated the national importance 
of his proposed endeavor under the first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework. 
Regarding his claim of eligibility under Dhanasar's first prong, the Petitioner indicated that he intends 
to continue to work in "the field of Physical Education, specifically within the.__ _____ ~--~ 
He asserted that his proposed endeavor involves serving "as ~ I Coach and Trainer to individuals" 
and assisting "them in creating a new, healthier lifes le." The Petitioner further stated that his 
undertaking is "dedicated, not just to trainin'-1-------.----~andl I artists and competitors 
but also to spreading his deep knowledge of.__ __ _.to the community, most SQecifically by training 
competitors, people with special needs, as well as training any individual on thel I which 
focus on mind and body balance in a wide assessment of health problems, including obesity." He also 
claimed that his proposed work involving! lstands "to have a positive impact on our nation's 
economy, societal health, and welfare." 
The Petitioner provided a January 2021 letter froml 11 owner of..........,_~ ______ ___. 
a martial arts training academy inl l~tating tha~the Petitioner has been working at the facility as a 
6 I since November 2016.5 indicated that the Petitioner's duties as a coach for 
involve leading "group and individua training sessions to improve athletic and technical 
skills," teaching I !classes to both children and adults," training "athletes one-on-one to improve 
~es," demonstrating "the proBer effectuation ofl lmoves," participating in competitive 
L___J events, modifying l Jmoves to accommodate students with various experience levels," 
and serving "as a referee or judge for competitiv~matches and showcase events." In addition, 
I lnoted that the Petitioner's work for~udes "counseling students on reaching their 
athletic aspirations," assisting "in organizing special events," identifying "areas for improvement in 
students' I . I performance," answering " uestions on properl~ ___ _.ltechniques," serving "as a 
seminar guest or visiting instructor for other trainin centers," formulating "individualized 
training schedules to prepare competitive athletes for.__ __ ~ vents," and teaching "competitors of 
2 See Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 888-91, for elaboration on these three prongs. 
3 The Petitioner presented an official academic record showing that he has the foreign equivalent of a U.S. baccalaureate 
degree, and evidence in the form of letters from his employers showing that he has at least five years of progressive post­
baccalaureate experience in the specialty. See 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(i)(B). He also provides information on appeal 
indicatin that a four- ear bachelor's de ree is t icall re uired for en in his occu ation. See 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2). 
5 As the Petitioner is applying for a waiver of the job offer requirement, it is not necessary for him to have a job offer from 
a specific employer. However, we will consider information about his current position to illustrate the capacity in which 
he intends to work in order to determine whether his proposed endeavor meets the requirements of the Dhanasar analytical 
framework. 
3 
an~ I to incorporat~ EJtheir performances." I 
further asserted that the Petitioner's work is aimed at expanding s "clientele, benefiting both our 
training center, and the health of the new students who come toC]Sports for his coaching. . . . [The 
Petitioner's] work also raises the competitiveness of U.S. athletes, which gives our country greater and 
more prestigious representation in national and international events." 
The Petitioner also submitted letters of support from both his martial art students and their parents. 6 For 
exampleJ I a client atn stated: .. In addition to teachini[ I as a stand-p I <lllrD<lft. I 
the Petitioner] teaches elements of[ Ito improve the games ofi._ _______ _.land 
athletes - maximizing the amount that he has to offer our country." Likewise, 
1-----.---an_o_.therc=J client, asserted that the Petitioner's work involves training U.S. athletes to 
succeed in "popular and lucrative! I events" and thus his proposed endeavor stands 
to "provide a huge advantage to our nation's economy." In addition! I a client 
whose spouse and child train with the Petitioner as well, indicated that the Petitioner's "training 
enabled our family to regain our health and make fitness a part of our lives. He trains us both 
individually and in groups, enabling us to strive toward our fitness goals affectively, while spending 
time together as a family." 
Furthermore, the record includes information about the value of the arts as contributors to the public 
realm, the benefits ofl I participation for children with special needs, cardiovascular 
responses in experienced practitioners ofl I and the role of expressive movement in attention-
deficit/hyperactivity disorder andl I Additionally, the Petitioner provided articles discussing 
the history o~ I the artistic aspects of the I I the economic costs of the U.S. obesity 
epidemic, the rise in obesity among U.S. adults, improvements in plantar pressure distribution among 
I !participants, andl I as a global cultural and educational lesson. He also submitted 
information about I I interventions as a way to reduce anger in adolescents, balance 
improvement in children and teenagers who practice~ I trends in obesity prevalence in U.S. 
youths and adults, the rise in obesity as a U.S. public health crisis, the social benefits ofl I and 
the ecological approach ofl !masters who work with people with disabilities. The record 
therefore supports the Director's determination that the Petitioner's proposed work as al I coach 
and trainer has substantial merit. 
In determining national importance, the relevant question is not the importance of the field, industry, 
or profession in which the individual will work; instead we focus on the "the specific endeavor that 
the foreign national proposes to undertake." See Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. In Dhanasar, we 
further 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. 
On appeal, the Petitioner contends that "despite the physical locations of [the Petitioner's] ~I _1~ _ _. 
seminars, classes, and performances - evidence reflects that his work nonetheless has a national impact." 
6 While we discuss a sampling of these letters, we have reviewed and considered each one. 
4 
He presents a I J 2020 article appearing in the theater program of the Inter-American 
Choreographic Institute's (IACD production of "Men Who Dance" at thel I Center for the 
Performing Arts' I ~ This IACI promotional article describes the show as a "historic 
event" and states that "Men Who Dance brings togethe~ I Ballet, Dance NOW! I I Cuban 
Classical Ballet, Dimensions Dance Theater ofl I Tango Out and others, including special guest 
Florida Grand Opera, in an epic tour-de-force." The Petitioner asserts that the article indicates "that the 
benefit of his impactful work expands beyond any number of students, workshop, or program attendees 
- expanding to his overall field," but he is not mentioned in the article. Nor is there information regarding 
the size of the audience who attended his performance. 8 
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. While the 
Petitioner's documentation reflects his intention to train clients and to promote! I he has not 
offered sufficient information and evidence to demon strate that the prospective impact of his proposed 
endeavor rises to the level of national importance. For example, he has not demonstrated that his 
involvement as al lcoach stands to impact the martial arts or U.S. cultural interests at a level 
consistent with having national importance. Nor has he shown that his proposed endeavor as~ I 
coach, trainer, and performer is at a level that would offer national implications for thd ! or 
that the implications of such work stand to impact his field more broadly. 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. Here, we conclude the record does not show 
that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor stands to sufficiently extend beyond c=J and its clientele to 
impact thel I or societal health and welfare more broadly at a level commensurate with 
national importance. 
Furthermore, the Petitioner has not demonstrated that the specific endeavor he 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 attributable to his future work, the record does not show that benefits to the U.S. 
regional or national economy resulting from the Petitioner's! , !coaching 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 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. 
7 While the Petitioner provided seating information for thd !cenfer's I I the record includes a 
playbill indicating that the "Men Who Dance" production took place at the~ ___ tenter 's smaller 1 I 
The record also includes photographs of the Petitioner on stage, but no audience is visible in these photographs. 
8 The Petitioner's claims regarding his past record of success in! I exhibitions relate to the second prong of the 
Dhanasar framework, which "shifts the focus from the proposed endeavor to the foreign national." Id. at 890. 
5 
III. CONCLUSION 
As the Petitioner has not met the requisite first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework, we conclude 
that he has not established he is eligible 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. 
6