dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Computer Engineering / It

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: MAY 9, 2024 In Re: 30185422 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, a computer engineer and IT consultant, seeks employment-based second preference 
(EB-2) 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 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 record did not 
establish that the Petitioner is eligible for a national interest waiver as a matter of discretion. The 
matter is now before us on appeal pursuant to 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 Christo '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, 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. 
An advanced degree is any U.S. academic or professional degree or a foreign equivalent degree above 
that of a bachelor's degree. A U.S. 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). 
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 l&N Dec. 884, 889 (AAO 2016), provides the 
framework for adjudicating national interest waiver petitions. Dhanasar states that U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration Services (USCIS) may, as matter of discretion, 1 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. 
II. ANALYSIS 
A. EB-2 Classification 
The Petitioner is a computer engineer and IT consultant. She submitted a diploma and transcripts for 
her degree in computer engineering from the in Ecuador; along 
with an academic evaluation that states her degree is equivalent to a U.S. bachelor's degree in 
computer science. In addition, the Petitioner submitted employment letters that establish five years of 
progressive experience in the specialty. The Director concluded that the Petitioner qualifies as a 
member of the professions holding an advanced degree and we agree. 
B. National Interest Waiver 
l. Substantial Merit 
The first prong, substantial merit and national importance, focuses on the specific endeavor that the 
individual 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. Dhanasar 26 I&N 
Dec. at 889. The Petitioner states that her proposed endeavor is to, "[d]evelop consulting, support and 
cybersecurity services for financial companies in order to comply with best business practices 
standards that allow a better workflow, providing an efficient quality service, while ensuring the 
security of their services and sensitive financial information they handle." The record includes articles 
and reports on the importance of information technology and cybersecurity in the financial industry 
along with various government initiatives supporting the industry. We conclude that the proposed 
endeavor has substantial merit. 
2. National Importance 
In determining whether the proposed endeavor has national importance, we consider its potential 
prospective impact. Id. The Petitioner asserts that the Director's decision, "[c ]ontains instances of a 
misunderstanding and misapplication of law that go beyond harmless error and reach the levels of 
abuse of discretion." In addition, she states that the Director provided an insufficient assessment of 
the totality of the evidence. Upon de novo review, we conclude that the Director properly analyzed 
the evidence to evaluate the Petitioner's eligibility by a preponderance of evidence and the Petitioner 
1 See Flores v. Garland, 72 F.4th 85, 88 (5th Cir. 2023) (joining the Ninth, Eleventh, and D.C. Circuit Courts (and Third 
in an unpublished decision) in concluding that USCIS' decision to grant or deny a national interest waiver is discretionary 
in nature). 
2 
did not demonstrate that her proposed endeavor satisfies the national importance element of 
Dhanasar's first prong, as discussed below. Matter ofChawathe, 25 I&N Dec. at 375-76. 
The Petitioner contends the Director did not assess the record as she submitted probatory evidence to 
meet the national importance criteria. The Petitioner states that her proposed endeavor is of national 
importance because of the importance of cybersecurity and a thriving digital banking ecosystem. She 
points to the reports, articles, and research that was submitted regarding substantial merit and national 
importance, as well as her personal statement, and her national importance statement. Later in the 
appeal brief the Petitioner questions why USCIS states industry reports and articles can be submitted 
for national importance if they do not show national importance. 
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 specific endeavor that the 
foreign national proposes to undertake." Dhanasar 26 I&N Dec. at 889. We recognize the value and 
importance of the industry; however, working in an important field is insufficient to establish the 
national importance of the proposed endeavor. Here, the Petitioner improperly relies upon the 
importance of the industry to establish the national importance of her proposed endeavor. Although 
the industry reports and articles provide good background information on the industry itself: the 
industry being important to the U.S. government, and its substantial merit; without sufficient 
documentary evidence of the specific proposed endeavor's broader impact on the industry, the 
Petitioner's proposed endeavor does not meet the "national importance" element of the first prong of 
the Dhanasar framework. 
An endeavor may have national importance if it has, "significant potential to employ U.S. workers" 
or "other substantial positive economic effects, particularly in an economically depressed area." Id. at 
890. The Petitioner contends her proposed endeavor has significant potential to employ U.S. workers 
with the intent to hire seven employees; based on the plain language meaning of the word "significant" 
she defines as "having meaning" and the plural of the word "workers," meaning more than one worker. 
Although Dhanasar does not specify an exact number of workers the proposed endeavor should 
employ to be nationally important, this area of the analysis is about economic impact. It should have 
a broader impact to the region through staffing levels, business activity, or have other substantial 
positive economic effects to rise to the level of national importance. The record does not establish a 
prospective broader impact with this number of workers and therefore does not rise to the level of 
national importance. 
Further, the Petitioner does not explain how the Director erred in their analysis that the proposed 
endeavor would not have "other substantial positive economic effects", but states she has, 
"demonstrated by a preponderance of the evidence, as explained before, that her endeavor will have 
substantial positive economic effects both regionally and across the Nation." No reference was made 
to any error in the Director's analysis, or why the Petitioner's proposed endeavor would have 
substantial positive economic effects. Therefore, the Petitioner has not established that her proposed 
endeavor would have enough of an economic impact through employment of U.S. workers or other 
economic impacts to rise to the level of national importance. 
Dhanasar states a proposed endeavor may have national importance because it has, "national or even 
global implications within a particular field." Id. at 889. The Petitioner states in her updated national 
3 
importance statement that her endeavor will help credit unions in New Jersey meet their clients' needs, 
increase their efficiency, and help protect client information while focusing on cybersecurity 
mitigation and protection. While we acknowledge the importance of this work, the record does not 
establish that the Petitioner's endeavor has national or global implications within the field. 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. Dhanasar at 893. 
Similarly, the evidence here shows the services the Petitioner intends to provide to her direct clients, 
but it does not show how her services will impact the field more broadly to have national or global 
implications. 
While we do not discuss each piece of evidence individually, we have reviewed and considered the 
record in its entirety. As the Petitioner's proposed work does not meet the first prong of the Dhanasar 
framework, the Petitioner has not demonstrated eligibility for a national interest waiver. Because the 
identified reasons for dismissal are dispositive of the Petitioner's appeal, we decline to reach and 
hereby reserve remaining arguments concerning eligibility under the Dhanasar framework. 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 I&N Dec. 516, 526 n. 7 (BIA 2015) ( declining to reach alternative issues on appeal where the 
applicant did not otherwise meet their burden of proof). 
III. CONCLUSION 
The Petitioner has not met the requisite first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework. We 
therefore conclude by a preponderance of the evidence that the Petitioner has not established that she 
is eligible for or otherwise merits a national interest waiver as a matter of discretion. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
4