dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Community Development

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
MATTER OF D-0-
APPEAL OF TEXAS SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: MAY 5, 2017 
PETITION: FORM I-140, IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER 
The Petitioner, a mmtster who works in community development and outreach, seeks second 
preference immigrant classification as an individual of exceptional ability under 8 C.F.R. 
§ 204.5(k)(2), 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 the 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 
r 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. Matter of Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. 884 
(AAO 2016). 
The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien 
Worker, finding that the Petitioner qualified as an individual of exceptional ability, but that he had 
not established that a waiver df the required job offer, and thus of the labor certification, would be in 
the national interest. 
On appeal, the Petitioner submits additional documentation and argues that he is eligible for a 
national interest waiver because his work, in which he proposes to start a bee farming program, will 
"boost the economy of the USA and serve as an additive to other contributors in Community 
development." In February 2017, we issued a request for evidence (RFE) asking the Petitioner to 
provide further evidence establishing his qualifications ,as an individual of exceptional ability and 
satisfying the three-part framework set forth in Dhanasar. He did not respond to our RFE. 
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 
Matter of D-0-
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 of job 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 
the United 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. 
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) (NYSDOT). 
2 
Matter of D-0-
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, 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 States to waive the requirements of a job offer and thus of a labor certification? 
II. ANALYSIS 
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 petitioher 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.P.R. § 103.2(b)(13)(i). As stated previously, we issued an RFE asking for further evidence to 
establish the Petitioner's qualifications as an individual bf exceptional ability and to demonstrate his 
eligibility for a national interest waiver under the three-part framew~rk set forth in Dhanasar. 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 4a days have lapsed, 
and we have yet to receive a response f~om 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 )(13 ). 
In the alternative, as discussed below, we find that the Petitioner has not demonstrated that he 
qualifies for classification as an individual of exceptional ability or that he meets the eligibility 
requirements for a national interest waiver as set forth in Dhanasar. 
2 
See Dha~qsar, 26 I&N Dec. at 888-9 I, for elaboration on these three prongs. 
3 
.
Matter of D-0-
B. Exceptional Ability 
The Petitioner indicates that he works in community development and outreach and that he intends 
to set up a bee farm in that "will assist in empowering the economic stance of the 
community," and "add value for employment especially among the youths of this community." He 
writes that the project will "assist in training those interested in bee-keeping to actualize their 
dreams." 
As noted above, the Director found that the Petitioner qualifies for classification as an individual of 
exceptional ability in the arts, sciences, or business. However, in our RFE, we noted several 
insufficiencies in the evidence relating to this classification. Therefore, we provided the Petitioner 
with an opportunity to establish that his proposed work relates to the sciences, arts, or business, and to 
demonstrate that the documentation submitted under the relevant criteria reflects a degree of expertise 
above that ordinarily encountered among ministers or community developers and outreach workers. 
As the Petitioner did not respond to the RFE, we will make a determination based upon the record as 
it stands. 
The USCIS regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(ii) reads: 
/ To show that the alien is an alien of exceptional ability in the sciences, arts, or 
business, the petition must be accompanied by at least three of the following: 
(A) An official academic record showing that the alien has a degree, diploma, 
certificate, or similar award from a college, university, school, or other 
institution of learning relating to the area of exceptional ability; 
(B) Evidence in the form of letter(s) from current or former employer(s) 
showing that the alien has at least ten years of full-time experience in the 
occupation for which he or she is being sought; 
(C) A license to practice the profession or certification for a particular 
profession or occupation; 
(D) Evidence that the alien has commanded a salary, or other remuneration for 
services, which demonstrates exceptional ability; 
(E) Evidence of membership in professional associations; or 
(F) Evidence of recognition for achievements and significant contributions to 
the industry or field by peers, governmental entities, or professional or 
business organizations. 
If a petitioner submits the requisite evidence, we then go on to consider whether the record 
demonstrates "a degree of expertise significantly above that ordinarily encountered." 8 C.F.R. 
4 
.
Matter of D-0-
§ 204.5(k)(2); cf Kazarian v. USC IS, 596 F .3d 1115 (9th Cir. 201 0) (discussing a similar two-part 
framework relating to individuals of "extraordinary ability" where the evidence is first counted and 
then, if satisfying the required number of criteria, considered in the context of a final merits 
determination). 
Here, the Director found that the Petitioner met the evidentiary criterion of possession of a license to 
practice the profession or certification for a particular profession or occupation at 8 C.P.R. 
§ 204.5(k)(3)(ii)(C) based upon his certificates of ordination from 
located in Texas; Assemblies of God Church, located in Nigeria; and, 
located in New Jersey. The Director also determined that the Petitioner's 
membership in meets the criterion for 
membership in professional associations under 8 C.P.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(ii)(E). Finally, the Director 
found that the Petitioner established his recognition for achievements and significant contributions to 
the industry or field by peers, governmental entities, or professional or business organizations. 
8 C.P.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(ii)(F). The Director concluded that the testimonial letters, awards, and 
honorary degrees support a finding that the Petitioner has been recognized for achievements and 
significant contributions by his peers. Accordingly, the Director found that the Petitioner met ·at least 
three of the ten criteria listed at 8 C.P.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(ii). 
The Director then found that the totality, of the evid~nce established the Petitioner has a degree of 
expertise significantly above that ordinarily encountered in the sciences, arts, or business. However, we 
find that this determination is not supported by the record. Specifically, as the Petitioner did not 
respond to our request to explain how his anticipated work in community development, ministry, and 
outreach relates to the sciences, arts, or business, we cannot conclude that the Petitioner meets the 
requirements of this classification. We also disagree with the Director's conclusion that the 
evidence submitted . demonstrates that the Petitioner possesses a degree of expertise that is 
significantly above that ordinarily encountered in community development, ministry, or outreach, as 
explained below. 
The Petitioner documented his membership in professional associations 
and he has established that he is an ordained minister with a 
license to practice Christian ministry. Nevertheless, the Petitioner has not shown that his licenses or 
memberships demonstrate "a degree of expertise significantly above that ordinarily encountered" 
among ministers or community developers. The Petitioner also submitted evidence that he has been 
recognized for achievements and significant contributions by his peers. We note that the record 
contains awards and donations that indicate that churches and religious organizations have supported 
the Petitioner's outreach work and donated resources in support. However, the Petitioner has not 
shown that this support reflects expertise that is significantly above that of other religious 
community development/outreach workers. 
The Petitioner provided copies of several recommendation letters from individuals who have worked 
with him in various capacities. The letters contain general praise for the Petitioner's skill and 
dedication, but they do not distinguish him from other community developers to show how he has a 
degree of expertise significantly above that ordinarily encountered in community development and 
5 
.
Matter of D-0-
outreach. For example, writes that the Petitioner has been involved in developing 
new churches throughout Nigeria. He also states that the Petitioner has added much value to 
missions movements in several nations. explains that the Petitioner has carried out 
work in Nigeria that has "transformed lives and communities," such as "building homes for the 
homeless." 
comments on the work that the Petitioner has done as a pastor with various 
congregations throughout Nigeria and how he has "broken bounds [sic], done many exploits, and 
spent a very long time as a leader of a church." 
New York comments that the Petitioner "worked among the homeless in 
where he would gather, feed, and teach and encourage them with the good news of 
hope." He further states: "In he built a community center for the community. In 
in he set up housing structures for the residents." While these statements indicate that 
the Petitioner was performing valuable work, without additional evidence, the record does not 
support a finding that his accomplishments are indicative of expertise significantly above that 
encountered in community development, ministry, or outreach. As such, the AAO finds that the 
Petitioner has not satisfactorily shown that he qualifies as an individual of exceptional ability under 
section 203(b)(2) of the Act. The Director's determination on this issue is, therefore, withdrawn. 
C. National Interest Waiver 
Even if the Petitioner demonstrated that he qualifies as an individual of exceptional ability, he has 
not provided sufficient evidence that he is eligible for a national interest waiver. The Petitioner 
stated that he would be working in the field of community development and described his role as 
"correcting the mindset of the hopeless, less privileged to see life in a positive direction" through 
"ministry, outreach, and Christian education." Specifically, he explained that he intends to set up a 
bee farm in that "will assist in empowering the economic stance of the community," and "add 
value for employment especially among the youths of this community," and that this endeavor will 
"assist in training those interested in bee-keeping to actualize their dreams." As noted above, 
because Dhanasar was issued before we adjudicated the petition, we issued an RFE to obtain 
additional information and evidence regarding the Petitioner's eligibility under the new framework. See 
8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(8) (requests for evidence). Again, the Petitioner did not respond to the RFE 
addressing the Dhanasar framework and thus we will make a determination based upon the current 
record. 
The record as it stands does. not sufficiently establish that the proposed endeavor has substantial merit 
and national importance under Dhanasar's first prong. The Petitioner made general statements 
regarding the potential impact of his proposed e_ndeavor. For instance, he stated that it will "make 
more productive use of natural resources," "improve education," "improve wages and working 
conditions of US," "[benefit] the American economy because jobs will be created," and "serve the 
interest of the following US government agencies: United States department of Health and Human 
Services, Department of Agriculture, Department of Labor, US department ofHome Land Security." 
He further stated that "America can become the highest producer of in the world." 
The Petitioner also described how he intends to use Texas, as the "pest-setting ground," and 
6 
.
Matter of D-0-
then expand to other states, and that the bee-keeping farm in 
stance" ofthe United States, particularly at-risk youth. 
will empower the "economic 
However, the record does,not contain sufficient evidence supporting the above assertions. While the 
Petitioner broadly ·contends that his endeavor will have substantial positive economic effects for the 
nation, the record lacks information about specific nature of the proposed endeavor such as projected 
staffing levels, the number of youth he aims to impact, and the quantity and types of any intended 
products. Furthermore, the record does not include documentation or explanations supporting the 
Petitioner's statements .that his work will "make more productive use of natural resources," and 
serve the interest of government agencies. Without additional information and evidence, the 
Petitioner has not established the implications of his proposed endeavor and its potential prospective 
impact on the United States. 
With respect to the second prong of the Dhanasar analysis, the Petitioner has not supplied adequate 
evidence documenting the specific ways in which his experience renders him well positioned to 
advance the field of community development. He states that he has "spent 37 years in humanitarian 
services via community transformation programs in Nigeria and outside Nigeria," and that he has an 
"established/registered Non-governmental organization ( 
' under which he carried out his bee farming and aid initiatives in Nigeria and other 
countries. The record also includes copies of the formation documents for two charitable 
organizations: and 
However, he has not provided evidence ;regarding his record of success in these projects to 
demonstrate that they render him well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor. 
In addition, the Petitioner submitted various reference letters discussing his work as a pastor in 
Nigeria, but these letters do not include specific information describing the projects he led, their 
outcomes, or their impact on the communities noted. He has also failed to provide evidence 
demonstrating a history of success in any endeavors similar to the one he proposes to undertake, 
showing the interest of relevant parties in the proposal, documenting how he will secure funding, or 
otherwise establishing that he is well positioned to start the bee farming program he has proposed. 
Finally, the Petitioner has not rendered evidence explaining why a labor certification would be 
impractical in his case; whether the United States would benefit from his contributions even if other 
U.S. workers are also available; or whether urgency warrants foregoing the labor certification 
process, such that we can determine that, on balance, a waiver of the labor certification is warranted. 
In summary, the evidence of record does not include sufficient information and evidence regarding 
the proposed endeavor to establish that the Petitioner's work will have both substantial merit and 
national importance. He has not sufficiently described his intended project or documented his past 
achievements to show that he is well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor. Finally, 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. As the Petitioner has not met the 
J 
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. 
7 
Matter of D-0-
III. CONCLUSION 
As the Petitioner did not respond to our RFE asking ·for further evidence to establish his 
qualifications as an individual of exceptional ability and to demonstrate his eligibility for a national 
interest waiver, we consider the appeal to be abandoned. Additionally, we further find that the 
Petitioner has not satisfactorily shown that he qualifies as an individual of exceptional ability under 
section 203(b )(2) of the Act, and has not established that he is eligible for a national interest waiver 
under the three-part framework outlined in Dhanasar. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
Cite as Matter of D-0-, ID# 76247 (AAO May 5, 2017) 
8