dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Digital Marketing

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: JUN. 21, 2024 In Re: 31201223 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, an entrepreneur in the field of digital marketing, 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. § l 153(b)(2). 
The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the petition, concluding that although the Petitioner 
established his eligibility for EB-2 classification, he did not demonstrate 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 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 l&N Dec. 537, 537 n.2 (AAO 2015). Upon de novo review, 
we will dismiss the appeal. 1 
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." 
1 Appeals filed by representatives must contain a new, properly executed Form G-28, Notice of Entry of Appearance as 
Attorney or Accredited Representative. 8 C.F.R. § 292.4(a). The attorney or accredited representative must sign the Form 
G-28. A photocopy, scan, or fax of an original signature is acceptable, but a signature created by typewriter, auto-pen, 
stamp, or similar device is not acceptable. 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(a)(2); 1 USCJS Policy Manual B.2(B), 
https://www.uscis.gov/policymanual. At the time of filing the appeal, the Petitioner provided a copy of a Form G-28 for 
containing a signature created by auto-pen. We sent a notice advising the Petitioner that 
since the appeal did not contain a properly executed Form G-28, we must treat the appeal as self-represented. The record 
does not contain a response from the Petitioner to our notice. Because this appeal does not contain a properly executed 
Form G-28, we consider it to be self-represented. 
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, 2 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. 3 
II. ANALYSIS 
According to the Petitioner's resume, he works as a digital marketing manager with the ___
I I Florida, as a parttime freelance marketing consultant inl lFlorida, and 
as the founder and chief marketing officer ofI IBrazil. The Director 
determined that the Petitioner qualifies for the underlying EB-2 classification as a member of the 
professions holding an advanced degree, and the record supports this conclusion. 4 Therefore, the primary 
issue on appeal is whether the Petitioner meets the requirements of the three prongs of the Dhanasar 
analytical framework and otherwise merits a national interest waiver as a matter of discretion. 
In denying the petition, the Director addressed all three prongs ofthe Dhanasar framework and concluded 
that the Petitioner did not demonstrate that he meets any of them. On appeal, the Petitioner asserts that 
he established that a waiver of the job offer requirement would be in the national interest and contends 
that the Director did not objectively evaluate all the submitted evidence. For the reasons provided below, 
we agree with the Director that the Petitioner has not sufficiently demonstrated the national importance 
of his proposed endeavor under the first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework. 5 
A. Proposed Endeavor 
At the time of filing, the Petitioner indicated that he intends to advance his career as an "Entrepreneur 
in the field of Digital Marketing." Specifically, the Petitioner submitted a Definitive Statement and 
other documentation indicating that he has recently formed his own digital marketing services 
consulting firm, to "provide[] comprehensive consulting services including 
market research, branding strategies, website design, digital marketing strategies, search engine 
optimizations (SEOs), social media strategies, advertising strategies, and content marketing plans." 
The Petitioner's initial submission also included a business plan for I I that indicates 
the proposed endeavor will focus on the retail industry, be headquartered in Florida, and open 
2 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). 
3 See Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 888-91, for elaboration on these three prongs. 
4 The record establishes that the Petitioner holds the foreign equivalent of a bachelor's degree from an institution of higher 
education in the United States, and that he has at least five years of progressive, post-baccalaureate experience in his 
specialty. See 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3). 
5 While we do not discuss each piece of evidence individually, we have reviewed and considered each one. 
2 
regional offices inl IGeorgia and I I Texas by the end of its fifth year. It includes industry 
and market analyses, business strategies, financial forecasts and projections, and a description of the 
company's proposed service offerings and personnel. With respect to future staffing, the business plan 
projects that the Petitioner's digital marketing business would hire 97 employees in the first five years 
of operations, pay $3,293,975 in "total tax," and achieve gross revenue of $1,873,856 in its first year 
and $8,022,308 by its fifth year. 
Within his response to the Director's request for evidence issued in November 2022, the Petitioner 
claimed that his proposed endeavor will have a substantial economic effect on an underserved business 
economy in I I Florida because his firm's initial location would be in an area the U.S. 
Small Business Administration (SBA) has designated as a "HUBZone." 6 The Petitioner provided a 
screenshot dated January 2023 from the SBA showing an SBA HUBZone area in I I Florida. 7 
B. Substantial Merit and National Importance 
The first prong of the Dhanasar framework focuses on the specific endeavor the individual proposes 
to undertake and requires the Petitioner to establish both the substantial merit and national importance 
of the endeavor. The endeavor's merit may be demonstrated in a range of areas such as business, 
entrepreneurialism, science, technology, culture, health, or education. In determining whether the 
proposed endeavor has national importance, we consider its potential prospective impact. Dhanasar, 
26 I&N Dec. at 889. The Director concluded that the Petitioner demonstrated that his proposed 
endeavor has substantial merit but determined he did not meet his burden to establish the national 
importance of the endeavor. 
Specifically, the Director determined that the Petitioner had not shown how his proposed endeavor 
would have broader implications within his field that would reach beyond clients utilizing his services, 
or that it would broadly enhance societal welfare. In this regard, the Director observed that the 
Petitioner's evidence and arguments pertaining to "Digital Marketing and its national importance in 
the United States" did not demonstrate the potential prospective impact of his proposed endeavor. The 
Director further observed that the record did not demonstrate that the proposed endeavor has 
significant potential to employ U.S. workers, would impact an economically depressed area, or would 
have benefits to the regional or national economy that would reach the level of "substantial economic 
effects" contemplated by Dhanasar. Id. at 890. 
On appeal, the Petitioner maintains that the Director did not give due regard to his Definitive 
Statement; business plan; recommendation letters; industry reports and articles demonstrating the 
national importance of his proposed endeavor; and evidence of his professional experience and 
6 Under the HUBZone program, the U.S. government seeks to fuel small business growth in historically underutilized 
business zones, with a goal of annually awarding at least 3% of federal contract dollars to HUBZone-certified companies 
annually. See "HUBZone Program," https://www.sba.gov/federal-contracting/contracting-assistanceprograms/hubzone­
program. 
7 The screenshot indicates that the address of Florida is in an SBA HUBZone area; we note 
that the 2023 Florida Limited Liability Company Annual Report for filed in Janua 2023 with the 
Florida Secretary of State, lists its principal address as Florida. See 
htt s://search.sunbiz.or /In ui /Co orationSearch/GetDocument?a 
________________________________ __.formatType=PDF 
(accessed June 18, 2024). 
3 
accomplishments. He further maintains that his "more than seventeen ( l 7) years" of experience in the 
digital marketing field, "including running a successful business in Brazil," has brought numerous 
advantages to the companies for which he has worked throughout his career and that he will continue 
to do so as an entrepreneur in this sector in the United States. In support of these claims, he references 
previously submitted media articles and reports regarding the importance of digital marketing to a 
business organization and the impacts of immigrant entrepreneurs on the U.S. economy. 
When determining national importance, however, the relevant question is not the importance of the 
industry, sector, or profession in which the individual will work; instead, we focus on "the specific 
endeavor that the foreign national proposes to undertake." Matter ofDhanasar, 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. On appeal, the Petitioner maintains 
that his proposed endeavor will have a substantial economic effect on an underserved business 
economy, noting that his firm's initial location would be in an SBA HUBZone in Florida.Florida. 
However, the Petitioner's business plan states only that the business will open inc==] Florida; it 
makes no mention of the HUBZone program or its intent to establish a location within a designated 
HUBZone or to participate in the program. 
In addition, even if the business were to be physically located within an economically depressed area, 
the direct employment, indirect job creation, and revenue projections included in the Petitioner's 
business plan are not supported by details showing their basis or an explanation of how those 
projections will be realized. Further, while the business plan projects the firm's employment of up to 
97 workers at three locations within five years, the Petitioner has not established that this addition to 
the workforce in any of the three locations, including the claimed HUBZone region, would be of 
sufficient significance to rise to the level of national importance. For all these reasons, the Petitioner 
has not shown his endeavor has significant potential to employ U.S. workers or that the specific 
proposed endeavor would offer a region or its population a substantial economic benefit through 
employment levels, business activity, or related tax revenue. 
Further, although the Petitioner broadly states that the staffing and income projections of his proposed 
endeavor "hold the potential to exert a substantial impact on the broader U.S. economy" and will 
"resonate at a national level," the record does not provide adequate support for a determination that 
his specific proposed endeavor will have such a wide-reaching impact. The burden is on the Petitioner 
to establish that the economic effects of his proposed endeavor are "substantial." 
Based on the business plan provided within the initial submission, the Petitioner has not shown how 
the digital marketing services he intends to provide to U.S. businesses would have broader 
implications in the digital marketing field or the retail industry that rise to the level of national 
importance, or that the company's activities would impact the field beyond the company and its clients. 
While the projected profit and loss table indicates that the Petitioner's company has growth potential, 
the record does not show that benefits to the U.S. regional or national economy resulting from the 
4 
Petitioner's proposed endeavor would reach the level of "substantial positive economic effects" as 
contemplated by Dhanasar. 
Finally, before the Director and in his appellate brief, the Petitioner has placed considerable emphasis 
on his academic training in advertising and his professional experience in the digital marketing field. 
The record also contains recommendation letters from employers and colleagues in Brazil and Florida. 
While important, the Petitioner's expertise acquired through his academic and professional career 
primarily relates to the second prong of the Dhanasar framework, which "shifts the focus from the 
proposed endeavor to the foreign national." Id. The issue here is whether the specific endeavor the 
Petitioner proposes to undertake has national importance under Dhanasar 's first prong. A 
determination regarding the claimed national importance of a specific proposed endeavor cannot be 
inferred based on the Petitioner's past accomplishments, just as it cannot be inferred based on general 
claims about the importance of a given field or industry. 
For the reasons discussed, the evidence does not establish the national importance of the proposed 
endeavor as required by the first prong of the Dhanasar precedent decision. The Petitioner has not 
shown how the services he intends to provide would have broader implications in the digital marketing 
field or the retail industry. Because the Petitioner has not established his proposed endeavor has 
national importance, he is not eligible for a national interest waiver under the Dhanasar analytical 
framework. We reserve our opinion regarding whether the evidence of record satisfies the second and 
third Dhanasar prongs. 8 
III. CONCLUSION 
As the Petitioner has not met the requisite first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework, we 
conclude that he has not established he is eligible for, or otherwise merits, a national interest waiver 
as a matter of discretion. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
8 See INS v Bagamashad, 429 U.S. 24, 25-6 (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). 
5