dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Conflict Resolution

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: JUL. 23, 2024 In Re: 31839823 
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. 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 the Petitioner had not 
established eligibility for 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. 
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 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 l&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 the proposed endeavor, and 
• On balance, waiving the job offer requirement would benefit the United States. 
Id. at 889. 
1 See also 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Third in an unpublished decision) in concluding that USCIS' decision to grant or deny a national interest waiver to be 
discretionary in nature). 
At the outset, the Director acknowledged that the Petitioner qualified as a member of the professionals 
holding an advanced degree or its equivalent. 2 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 attorney's cover letter indicated the Petitioner's proposed endeavor was as 
follows: 
".... to contribute and positively impact the school environment of the 
United States, by carrying out a project of mediation and conflict 
resolution, through cultural and pedagogical practices. Mr. I I 
project will be named _______________ and 
will be primarily focused on writing, where participants create texts, 
promoting peacebuilding. This will be carried out in Educational 
Institutions in the United States, through the use of their phones, the 
Petitioner will project on a screen what is being written by the students 
around the different topics proposed by the facilitator." 
In the request for evidence (RFE), the Director acknowledged that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor 
has substantial merit. However, the Director requested evidence that the Petitioner's proposed 
endeavor had national importance, he was well-positioned to advance the proposed endeavor and 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 response to the Director's RFE, the Petitioner provided a proposed endeavor 
statement, a national importance statement and a business plan. The Petitioner also submitted two 
letters of recommendation and several articles from various government, non-governmental and 
international organizations in support of his substantial merit and national importance argument. The 
Director subsequently denied the petition. 
On appeal, the Petitioner accurately points out that the Director erroneously referred to the Petitioner's 
proposed employment as a "Consultant in the Field of Healthcare" and refers to the Petitioner's 
involvement in the healthcare industry and providing healthcare services. However, despite this 
anomaly, the Director fully addressed the Petitioner's actual proposed endeavor in conflict resolution. 
The Director noted that the Petitioner planned to open a conflict resolution consultancy focusing on 
the art of mediation amongst young men and women to ensure peaceful classrooms and reiterated that 
the Petitioner's proposed endeavor as a "Consultant with the goal of benefiting school age Americans 
in classrooms has substantial merit." Therefore, we determine this mischaracterization to be harmless 
error. 
As it relates to substantial merit, 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 record contains sufficient evidence of the substantial merit of the Petitioner's initial 
proposed endeavor, and we therefore agree with the Director's findings. 
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 
2 The Petitioner presented copies of his diploma and transcripts for his master's degree in Conflict Resolution and a juris 
doctor degree from the 
2 
foreign national proposes to undertake." See Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. Although the Petitioner 
provided several articles from various government, non-governmental and international organizations 
in support of his substantial merit and national importance argument, the Petitioner must demonstrate 
the national importance of his specific, proposed endeavor of providing his particular mediation and 
conflict resolution services among young men and women in school. 3 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. 
Further, as indicated above, the Petitioner presented two recommendation letters from individuals who 
praised the Petitioner's past work in the field of mediation and conflict resolution among the youth. 
However, these letters discuss the importance of confliction resolution rather than focusing on the 
national importance of the Petitioner's specific, proposed endeavor. In addition, the letters do not 
explain how the Petitioner's particular services would have broader implications for our country. 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. Dhanasar, 26 I&N 
Dec. at 889. Here, the Petitioner did not demonstrate how his services largely influence the field and 
rise 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. The record does not show through supporting documentation how his 
endeavor sufficiently extends beyond his prospective employer or clients, to impact the field or the 
U.S. economy more broadly at a level commensurate with national importance. 
Finally, the Petitioner did not show how his endeavor involving conflict resolution services has 
significant potential to employ U.S. workers or otherwise offer substantial positive economic effects 
for our nation. Without evidence regarding any projected U.S. economic impact or job creation 
attributable to his particular future work, the record does not show any benefits to the U.S. regional or 
national economy resulting from his services that would reach the level of "substantial positive 
economic effects" contemplated by Dhanasar. Id. at 890. 
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. 4 
As the Petitioner has not met the requisite first prong ofthe Dhanasar analytical framework, we conclude 
that 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. 
3 The Petitioner's arguments and evidence relate to the substantial merit aspect of the proposed endeavor rather than the 
national importance part. 
4 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). 
3 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
4