dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Cyber Security

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: AUG. 19, 2024 In Re: 33420321 
Motion on Administrative Appeals Office Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, a cyber security professional, seeks employment-based second preference (EB-2) 
immigrant classification as an individual of exceptional ability, 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 Petitioner did not 
establish that he warranted a waiver of the job offer and labor certification requirements for EB-2 
classification. We dismissed a subsequent appeal. The matter is now before us on motion to 
reconsider. 
The Petitioner bears the burden of proof to demonstrate eligibility by a preponderance of the evidence. 
Matter of Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369, 375-76 (AAO 2010). Upon review, we will dismiss the 
motion. 
A motion to reconsider must establish that our prior decision was based on an incorrect application of 
law or policy and that the decision was incorrect based on the evidence in the record of proceedings 
at the time of the decision. 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(3). Our review on motion is limited to reviewing our 
latest decision. 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(l)(ii) . We may grant motions that satisfy these requirements and 
demonstrate eligibility for the requested benefit. 
In our prior decision, incorporated here by reference, we determined that the Petitioner had not 
provided sufficient evidence to establish the nature of his proposed endeavor or that it would have the 
economic, cultural or industry wide impacts required to establish the first prong of Matter of 
Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. 884, 889 (AAO 2016). 
On motion, the Petitioner argues that he provided a comprehensive overview of his proposed endeavor 
and that his work as a cyber security professional is nationally important because cybercrime poses a 
significant threat to the economy and national security. The Petitioner further states that the shortage 
in qualified cyber security professionals further illustrates how his work is nationally important. 
However, shortages in qualified workers are directly addressed by the U.S. Department of Labor 
through the labor certification process and is not a consideration for the national importance of a 
proposed endeavor. 
The Petitioner asserts that he will work in cyber security, generally, but does not identify whether he 
will work for a specific company, university, training center, cyber security firm, government entity, 
or whether he will start his own consulting firm. Rather, he reiterates that cyber security is an 
important national issue and that his expertise could help to mitigate the risk of cyber-attacks. It is not 
enough to assert that the Petitioner's work is nationally important. He must demonstrate through 
independent, objective evidence that his proposed endeavor will have the claimed economic effects. 
As the Petitioner has not identified a specific client or clients or provided details on how his specific 
work would affect the economy or national security, he has not met his burden to establish that his 
work rises to the level of national importance. 
We noted in Dhanasar that "we look for broader implications" of the proposed endeavor and 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. Although the Petitioner recounts the value and importance 
of cyber security and its general impact on the economy, Dhanasar requires us to focus on the "the 
specific endeavor that the foreign national proposes to undertake," not the importance of the field, 
industry, or profession in which the individual will work. Id. at 889. 
On motion to reconsider, the Petitioner has not established that our previous decision was based on an 
incorrect application of law or policy at the time we issued our decision. As the Petitioner has not 
identified a specific endeavor beyond working in cyber security, generally, he has not provided a direct 
evidentiary tie between his proposed endeavor and the claimed economic, cultural, or industry wide 
impacts necessary to establish national importance. Therefore, the motion will be dismissed. 8 C.F.R. 
§ 103.5(a)(4). 
ORDER: The motion to reconsider is dismissed. 
2