dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Culinary Arts

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: MAY 10, 2024 In Re: 30336205 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, a chef and entrepreneur, 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. See section 203(b)(2)(B)(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 
qualifies for the EB-2 classification as an advanced degree professional, the record did not establish 
that a waiver of the job offer requirement is in the national interest. 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 Christa'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 immigrant 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. 
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 at least five years of progressive experience in the specialty is the equivalent of a 
master's degree. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2). 
Once a petitioner demonstrates eligibility as either a member of the professions holding an advanced 
degree or an individual of exceptional ability, the petitioner must then establish eligibility for a 
discretionary waiver of the job offer requirement "in the national interest." Section 203(b )(2)(B)(i) of 
the Act. While neither 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 USCIS may, as a 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 
The 
Director determined that the Petitioner qualifies for the EB-2 classification as an advanced degree 
professional, based upon obtaining the foreign equivalent of a bachelor's degree in culinary arts 
followed by at least five years of progressive experience as a chef. See 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2). 
However, upon de novo review, we conclude that this finding is not supported by the record. The 
Petitioner provided a copy of her diploma and transcript for her titulo de bacharela degree in culinary 
arts, awarded in 2018 in Brazil, and a credential evaluation regarding the U.S. equivalency of this 
degree program. The credential evaluation does not state that the degree is equivalent to a U.S. 
bachelor's degree, but rather that the recommended U.S. equivalency is "completion of at least three 
and one-half years of course work" toward a four-year bachelor's degree program at an accredited 
institution of higher education in the United States. Additionally, we consulted the American 
Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers (AACRAO) Electronic Database for 
Global Education (EDGE).2 According to EDGE, there are three-, four-, and five-year titulo de 
bacharel(a) degrees in Brazil, and only the four- and five-year degree represents attainment of a level 
of education comparable to a bachelor's degree in the United States. 3 The record does not demonstrate 
that the Petitioner has completed a four- or five-year degree, and therefore does not establish that she 
has attained the equivalent of a U.S. bachelor's degree. 
To establish the requisite five years of progressive experience in the specialty, the Petitioner submitted 
letters of recommendation. However, only one of these letters of recommendation is from a former 
employer. The regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(g)(l) requires that, to establish the requisite years of 
experience, a petitioner submit letters from current or former employers that contain a specific 
description of the duties performed. Additionally, this letter describes the Petitioner's training during 
an internship that was completed prior to the Petitioner obtaining her degree in 2018. The regulations 
also require that the requisite experience be obtained after the bachelor's degree. See 8 C.F.R. 
§ 204.5(k)(2) (a bachelor's degree or the foreign equivalent "followed by" at least five years of 
progressive experience in the specialty is the equivalent of a master's degree). Therefore, we conclude 
that the Petitioner also has not submitted sufficient evidence, in accordance with the regulations, to 
1 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). 
2 We consider EDGE to be a reliable source of information about foreign credential equivalencies. See Confluence Intern., 
Inc. v. Holder, Civil No. 08-2665 (DSD-JJG), 2009 WL 825793 (D. Minn. Mar. 27, 2009); Tisco Group, Inc. v. Napolitano, 
No. 09-cv-10072. 2010 WL 3464314 (E.D. Mich. Aug. 30, 2010); Sunshine Rehab Services, Inc. No. 09-13605. 2010 WL 
3325442 (E.D. Mich. Aug.20.2010). See also Viraj, LLC v. Holder, No. 2:12-CV-00127-RWS, 2013 WL 1943431 (N.D. 
Ga. May 18, 2013). 
3 See https://www.aacrao.org/edge/country/brazil for information regarding the education system in Brazil. 
2 
establish at least five years of progressive experience in the specialty following attainment of a 
bachelor's degree. The Petitioner would need to address the above deficiencies in any future 
proceedings where attainment of a U.S. bachelor's degree or its foreign equivalent and attainment of 
qualifying experience or training is required to establish eligibility. 
Turning now to the Petitioner's request for a national interest waiver, the Petitioner proposes to 
establish a business in I I Florida offering "specialized nutrition and gastronomy 
consultation services" as well as operating a restaurant offering healthy food options for delivery. The 
business plan states that the company will offer its consulting services to institutions such as hospitals, 
restaurants, and hotels to help improve the nutritional quality of their menu and their food handling 
and safety procedures. 
The Director found that the Petitioner did not establish any of the three required prongs of the 
Dhanasar analytical framework. Regarding the substantial merit of the proposed endeavor, the 
Director determined that the Petitioner did not submit sufficient documentary evidence to establish 
this requirement, that the Petitioner's statements did not provide "in depth insight as to what she 
intends to do as a chef and head cook," and that counsel's statements only show that the endeavor 
"adds to the pool of knowledge in the culinary arts field." 
On appeal, the Petitioner contends that she has provided sufficient detail regarding her proposed 
endeavor and that these details establish the endeavor's substantial merit. A petitioner may 
demonstrate their proposed endeavor's substantial merit "in a range of areas such as business, 
entrepreneurialism, science, technology, culture, health, or education." Matter of Dhanasar, 
26 I&N Dec. at 889. Based upon the evidence in the record of the benefits of a healthy diet and the 
Petitioner's plan to engage in an entrepreneurial effort to offer healthy meals to her customers and to 
assist other businesses in the same, we agree with the Petitioner that this is sufficient to demonstrate 
the substantial merit of the proposed endeavor. We withdraw the Director's finding that the proposed 
endeavor lacks substantial merit and conclude that the Petitioner has established this requirement. 
We tum next to whether the Petitioner has established that the proposed endeavor has national 
importance. In making this determination, we consider the proposed endeavor's potential prospective 
impact. Id. An endeavor that has national or global implications within a particular field, such as 
those resulting from certain improved manufacturing processes or medical advances, may have 
national importance. Id. Additionally, an endeavor that is regionally focused may nevertheless have 
national importance, such as an endeavor that has significant potential to employ U.S. workers or has 
other substantial positive economic effects, particularly in an economically depressed area. Id. at 890. 
The Director concluded that the business plan, articles, and evidence regarding the rise of obesity in 
the United States and the importance of eating a healthy diet did not demonstrate that the potential 
prospective impact of the endeavor rises to the level of national importance. The Director found that 
the business plan did not demonstrate that the restaurant would employ a significant population of 
workers, particularly in an economically depressed area, or would otherwise other significant 
economic effects. The Director also concluded that the articles and reports in the record did not 
demonstrate the national importance of the Petitioner's specific endeavor. Finally, the Director 
concluded that the Petitioner did not demonstrate the proposed endeavor stands to sufficiently affect 
or advance the field or the industry more broadly. 
3 
On appeal, the Petitioner contends that the Director considered only the endeavor's geographical 
breadth and potential to employ U.S. workers and did not sufficiently consider that the endeavor 
impacts a matter that is the subject of national initiatives. The Petitioner contends that the Director 
therefore improperly applied the prior analytical framework for adjudicating national interest waiver 
petitions from Matter ofNew York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT), 22 I&N Dec. 215 
(Act. Assoc. Comm'r 1998), which was vacated by our precedent decision in Matter ofDhanasar. 
The Petitioner asserts that the endeavor has the potential to improve societal welfare and the economy 
by improving the health of the U.S. population and that this demonstrates the endeavor's national 
importance because good nutrition and a healthy U.S. population are the subject of national initiatives. 
The Petitioner claims that the evidence of the growing demand for online food delivery options, the 
rising obesity rates in the United States, and the Petitioner's experience as a chef preparing healthy 
food demonstrate this claim. 
Upon review, we are unpersuaded by the Petitioner's claim that the Director improperly relied upon 
our vacated decision in Matter of NYSDOT or that the Director placed too much emphasis on the 
geographic impact of the endeavor. The Petitioner is correct that the analytical framework introduced 
in Matter ofDhanasar sought to reduce the focus on the geographic impact of an endeavor. See Matter 
ofDhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 887. However, we disagree that the Director relied on the regional nature 
of the Petitioner's endeavor in concluding that it lacks national importance. Rather, the Director 
concluded that the Petitioner did not offer sufficient information and evidence to demonstrate that the 
proposed endeavor would have substantial positive economic effects such as revenue or job creation, 
and that the Petitioner did not show that her proposed endeavor would have broader implications for 
her field. Upon de novo review, we agree. Although an endeavor that is regionally focused may have 
national importance, it must still have a broad impact. Id. at 889. 
Additionally, we disagree that the Petitioner has established the national importance of the proposed 
endeavor based upon its relation to matters of national initiatives. While the Petitioner emphasizes 
the importance of healthy eating, the problems associated with poor diet, and the economic and societal 
benefits of improved health, the record does not contain sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the 
proposed endeavor has the potential to impact these matters at a level that would rise to national 
importance. In determining whether a proposed endeavor has national importance, the relevant 
question is not the importance of the industry, field, or profession in which an individual will work; 
instead, we focus on the potential prospective impact of the "specific endeavor that the [ noncitizen] 
proposes to undertake." See id. While the Petitioner's proposed food delivery business may offer 
healthy food options to her own customers, and her consulting services may assist other businesses in 
doing the same, the record does not demonstrate that the endeavor has the potential to result in any 
meaningful impact on the health of the U.S. population in general. Any professional or business 
service has the potential to positively impact its clients and community, and thus the economy and 
societal welfare in tum; however, the Petitioner has not offered a sufficiently direct connection 
between her proposed endeavor and any demonstrable economic or societal welfare effects. 
On appeal, the Petitioner makes many impressive claims, such as the claims that the company will 
"stimulate the investment of foreign companies on American soil, generating a multiplier effect of 
opportunities and business for the American economy," that it will "bring exceptional and concrete 
4 
results to the American economy, by helping improve the quality and accessibility of healthy and 
delicious food," and that it has "the potential of offering healthier food to a countless number of 
communities, generating a broad impact in the local, regional, and national eating habits." However, 
these claims are not supported by the evidence in the record. The record includes the Petitioner's 
educational documents, recommendation letters, business plan, information about the Petitioner's 
company in Brazil, and articles about the importance of public health and of small businesses. 4 
Although the evidence demonstrates that the Petitioner has worked in the restaurant industry and that 
she intends to establish a food delivery and consulting business, the evidence does not demonstrate 
that the potential prospective impact of this endeavor includes improving the health of the U.S. 
population at a level that rises to national importance. 
The Petitioner has not established that the proposed endeavor has national importance, as required by 
the first Dhanasar prong; therefore, she is not eligible for a national interest waiver. We acknowledge 
the Petitioner's arguments on appeal as to the second and third prongs of Dhanasar but, having found 
that the evidence does not establish the Petitioner's eligibility as to national importance, we reserve 
our opinion regarding whether the record establishes the remaining Dhanasar prongs. 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 of L-A-C-, 
26 I&N Dec. 516, 526 n. 7 (BIA 2015) ( declining to reach alternative issues on appeal where the 
applicant is otherwise ineligible). 
III. CONCLUSION 
Because the Petitioner has not met the requisite first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework 
related to national importance, we conclude 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 The Petitioner also provided evidence that she has applied for and received interest from restaurants in hiring her for line 
cook and prep cook positions. However, these do not appear to relate to the Petitioner's proposed endeavor of establishing 
a consulting and food delivery business or help demonstrate its potential prospective impact. 
5