dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Dentistry

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: NOV. 21, 2023 In Re: 30041056 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, a dentist, 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 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 that the Petitioner qualified 
for classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree, but that she had not 
established that 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. 
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 l&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. Section 203(b )(2)(B)(i) of the Act. 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 I&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; 
1 See also Poursina v. USCIS, 936 F.3d 868 (9th Cir. 2019) (finding USCIS' decision to grant or deny a national interest 
waiver to be discretionary in nature). 
• 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 found that the Petitioner qualifies as a member of the professions holding an advanced 
degree. The remaining issue to be determined is whether the Petitioner has established that a waiver of 
the requirement of a job offer, and thus a labor certification, would be in the national interest. For the 
reasons discussed below, we conclude that the Petitioner has not sufficiently demonstrated the national 
importance of her proposed endeavor under the first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework. 
With respect to her proposed endeavor, the Petitioner initially indicated that she intends to continue using 
her "abilities as a dental surgeon to help meet the demand and ameliorate the shortage of dental health 
professionals in the country, provide highly skilled services to esteemed dental practices, provide 
educational lectures to empower other professionals in the field, and improve the oral and overall health 
of U.S. citizens." She further claimed that her "proposed endeavor is to work in general practice, clinical 
care, and advanced oral surgery." 
In response to the Director's request for evidence, the Petitioner asserted that her proposed endeavor 
involves practicing "advanced oral surgery, general practice, and oral aesthetic surgery." She further 
stated: 
I will use my solid knowledge in advanced oral surgery, facial bichectomy-lipectomy, 
dentistry, periodontics, and pediatric dentistry, diagnosing problems in the regions of the 
dental arches and performing surgeries to improve function or oral appearance. 
My solid knowledge of information and techniques will be the differential to diagnose and 
treat injuries, diseases, and oral deformities, including symptoms, treatment alternatives, 
drug properties, interactions, and preventative health measures. 
Since I have extensive experience in orofacial diagnostics and know the necessary 
information and techniques, I will diagnose and treat injuries, diseases, and deformities 
related to oral health. 
Furthermore, I will use my skills in conducting procedures such as tooth extractions, gum 
plastics, bichectomy ( facial lipectomy), and impacted and erupted wisdom tooth 
extraction with open and closed techniques . . . . I will use gingival plastic techniques 
with and without function. Also, I will do scaling and root planning with open and closed 
procedures and guide professional colleagues on how to proceed with surgeries. I will 
remove teeth from the hard palate and pull off adjacent tissues in the jaw region. 
Also, I will employ my knowledge of the information and techniques necessary to 
diagnose and treat human injuries, illnesses, and deformities, which includes symptoms, 
treatment alternatives, drug properties and interactions, and preventative health measures. 
2 
The record includes letters of support from K-V-M-A-, F-A-F-O-, M-F-S-, R-A-, and V-T-S-S­
discussing the Petitioner's dentistry capabilities and experience. The Petitioner's skills, knowledge, 
and prior work in her field, however, relate to the second prong of the Dhanasar framework, which 
"shifts the focus from the proposed endeavor to the foreign national." Id. at 890. The issue here is 
whether the specific endeavor that she proposes to undertake has national importance under 
Dhanasar's first prong. 
In the decision denying the petition, the Director determined that the Petitioner had established her 
proposed endeavor's substantial merit, but not its national importance. The Director stated that the 
Petitioner had not demonstrated that her undertaking stands to have broader implications in the field, 
significant potential to employ U.S. workers, or other substantial positive economic effects. 
In her appeal brief, the Petitioner contends that her "proposed endeavor's broader implications ... rest on 
the fact that [the Petitioner] is an expert in advanced oral surgery and is able to guide other professionals 
in surgical procedures," but she has not shown that her proposed instructional work offers broader 
implications for her field, as opposed to being limited to those individuals who receive her oral surgery 
guidance. While the Petitioner's plan to guide other dentistry professionals has substantial merit, she 
has not demonstrated that her instructional activities offer benefits that extend beyond her trainees to 
impact the fields of dentistry or oral surgery more broadly. Likewise, 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. Id. at 893. 
The Petitioner also asserts that her proposed endeavor has broader implications because "oral health plays 
a vital role in the physical, mental, social, and economic well-being of individuals and populations." She 
explains that her work saves lives through treating "severe oral and gum diseases and masticatory 
disorders, such as oral cancer." In addition, the Petitioner argues that her undertaking stands "to aid the 
U.S. population to regain well-being and self-esteem, so they are confident and prepared to fully devote 
themselves to their education and/or employment." 
Furthermore, the Petitioner claims that her proposed work involving oral health contributes to 
government initiatives such as Healthy People 2030 and InsureKidsNow.gov. While the information 
about these initiatives helps show the substantial merit of her proposed endeavor, it is not sufficient to 
demonstrate her undertaking's 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 "the specific endeavor that the foreign national proposes to undertake." See 
Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. In Dhanasar, we further 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. 
To evaluate whether the Petitioner's proposed endeavor satisfies the national importance requirement 
we look to evidence documenting the "potential prospective impact" of her work. While the 
Petitioner's proposed dental, oral surgery, and instructional duties have substantial merit, she has not 
offered sufficient information and evidence to demonstrate that the prospective impact of her proposed 
3 
endeavor rises to the level of national importance. 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. Id. at 893. Here, we conclude the Petitioner has not shown that her 
proposed dentistry work stands to sufficiently extend b eyond h er future patients and professional 
trainees to impact the dentistry field, U.S. public health, societal welfare, or our country's economy 
more broadly at a level commensurate with national importance . 
Furthermore, while the Petitioner contends on appeal that her proposed endeavor stands to "raise the 
standard of living," create "a healthy economy," help U.S. businesses , "create job opportunities," and 
reduce the "talent shortage" in her field, she has not demonstrated that her proposed work has 
significant potential to employ U.S. workers or otherwise offers substantial positive economic effects 
for our nation . 2 Without sufficient information or evidence regarding any projected U.S. economic 
impact or job creation attributable to her future work, the record does not indicate that the benefits to the 
regional or national economy resulting from the Petitioner's undertaking would reach the level of 
"substantial positive economic effects" contemplated by Dhanasar. Id. at 890. 
For the aforementione d reasons, the Petitioner's proposed work does not meet the first prong of the 
Dhanasar framework. Because the documentation in the record does not establish the national 
importance of her proposed endeavor as required by the first prong of the Dhanasar precedent decision, 
the Petitioner has not demonstrated eligibility for a national interest waiver. Since this issue is dispositive 
of the Petitioner's appeal, we decline to reach and hereby reserve the appellate arguments regarding 
her eligibility under the second and third prongs outlined in Dhanasar. See INS v. Bagamasbad, 429 
U.S. 24, 25 (1976) ("courts and agencies are not required to make findings on issues the decision of 
which is unnecessary to the results they reach") ; see also Matter ofL-A-C- , 26 I&N Dec. 516, 526 n.7 
(BIA 2015) (declining to reach alternative issues on appeal where an applicant is otherwise ineligible). 
III. CONCLUSION 
As the Petitioner has not met the requisite first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework, we conclude 
that she bas not established she is eligible for or otherwise merits a national interest waiver as a matter 
of discretion . The appeal will be dismissed for the above stated reasons, with each considered as an 
independent and alternate basis for the decision. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
2 Regarding the Petitioner 's "talent shortage" claim, we are not persuaded by the argument that her proposed endeavor has 
national importance due to the shortage of professionals in her field. Here, the Petitioner has not established that her 
proposed endeavor stands to impact or significantly reduce the claimed national shortage. Further, shortages of qualified 
workers are directly addressed by the U.S. Department of Labor through the labor certification process. 
4