dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Digital Marketing

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: SEP. 19, 2024 In Re: 33406444 
Appeal of Nebraska Service Center Decision 
Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, a digital marketing entrepreneur, seeks employment-based second preference (EB-2) 
immigrant classification as an advanced degree professional or a person of exceptional ability, as well 
as a discretionary 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 Nebraska 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 required job offer, and thus labor certification, would be in the national 
interest. This matter is now before us on appeal, which we review de novo. Matter ofChristo 's, Inc., 
26 I&N Dec. 537, 537 n.2 (AAO 2015). The Petitioner bears the burden of establishing his eligibility 
by a preponderance of the evidence. Matter of Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369, 375-76 (AAO 2010). 
Upon de novo review, we will dismiss the appeal. 
I.LAW 
To be eligible for a national interest waiver, a petitioner must first establish eligibility for the 
underlying EB-2 visa classification, as an advanced degree professional or an individual of exceptional 
ability in the sciences, arts, or business. Section 203(b)(2)(A), (B) of the Act; 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(l). 
If a petitioner establishes eligibility for the underlying EB-2 classification, they must then demonstrate 
that they warrant a discretionary waiver of the job offer requirement "in the national interest." 
Section 203(b)(2)(B)(i) of the Act. MatterofDhanasar, 26 I&NDec. 884,889 (AAO 2016), provides 
the framework for adjudicating national interest waiver petitions, which states that U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration Services (USCIS) may, as matter of discretion, 1 grant a national interest waiver if 
the petitioner establishes that: (1) the proposed endeavor has both substantial merit and national 
importance; (2) they are well positioned to advance their proposed endeavor; and (3) on balance, 
waiving the job offer and thus labor certification requirements would benefit the United States. Id. 
1 See Flores v. Garland, 72 F.4th 85, 88 (5th Cir. 2023) (joining the Ninth, Eleventh, and D.C. Circuit Courts in holding 
that USCIS ' decision on a national interest waiver is discretionary in nature) . 
II. ANALYSIS 
The Director determined, and the record-including a copy of the Petitioner's Brazilian civil engineer 
degree, college transcript, diploma evaluation, and letters from former employers and colleagues­
establishes that he qualifies for the EB-2 classification as an advanced degree professional holding a 
U.S.-equivalent bachelor's degree with at least five years of progressive post-degree experience in the 
field of specialty. 8 C.F.R. §§ 204.5(k)(l)-(2), (k)(3)(i)(B). 
The remaining issue on appeal is whether he warrants a discretionary national interest waiver under 
the Dhanasar framework and its requisite three prongs, any one of which is dispositive. The Director 
ultimately concluded that the record did not show that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor has national 
importance and thus he did not meet Dhanasar' s first prong. 2 The Petitioner does not submit any new 
evidence but alleges that the Director failed to consider all relevant evidence under the preponderance 
of the evidence standard in assessing the claimed national importance of his proposed endeavor. We 
conclude that the evidence does not establish that the proposed endeavor has national importance. 
Under the Dhanasar framework, the first prong, "substantial merit" and "national importance," 
focuses on the specific endeavor the Petitioner proposes to undertake. Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. 
The endeavor's merit under this prong may be demonstrated in a range of areas such as business, 
entrepreneurialism, science, technology, culture, health, or education. In evaluating whether the 
proposed endeavor has national importance, we consider its potential prospective impact. Id. 
The Petitioner intends to work as an online digital marketing entrepreneur and operate his own 
company that provides consulting services in market research, development strategies, and marketing 
campaign management and analytics by offering marketing tactics, including for product design, 
search engine optimization, targeted social media and email marketing, and digital advertising. 
Under the applicable preponderance of the evidence standard, we consider not only the quantity, but 
also the quality (including relevance and probative value) of the evidence. Matter of Chawathe, 
25 I&N Dec. at 375-76; Matter ofE-M-, 20 I&N Dec. 77, 79-80 (Comm'r 1989). In reasserting that 
his proposed endeavor has national importance, the Petitioner relies on his academic credentials and 
past experience, as indicated in his resume, business plan, an expert letter, other support letters, as well 
as the same market information included in the industry reports in the record generally noting the 
industry's significance. He reiterates that, given his background, expertise, and the high demand for 
qualified individuals in the online digital marketing field, which various government entities also have 
described as important, he is very well qualified to open and successfully run his own firm which will 
have substantial positive economic and societal impact. He further asserts that along with his business 
acumen, his ability to access large amounts of consumer and market data will ensure his company's 
success and even facilitate trade between the United States and Brazil in the digital market field. But 
the referenced evidence and assertions focus on his experience, skills, and other potentially available 
resources and relates to Dhanasar' s second prong, which pertains to whether he is well positioned to 
advance his endeavor and "shifts the focus from the proposed endeavor to the foreign national." 
Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 890. For assessing the national importance of a proposed endeavor under 
2 The Director otherwise summarily found that the record established that the proposed endeavor has substantial merit, the 
Petitioner is well positioned to advance it, and on balance it would be beneficial to waive the job offer and labor 
ce1tification requirements. 
2 
Dhanasar's first prong, we look to the specific endeavor itself and its "potential prospective impact." 
Id. at 889. Thus, as relevant here, we assess whether the specific endeavor he proposes to undertake 
has broader national significance, rather than on the importance of his profession or industry in which 
he proposes to engage. Id. Here, as owner and general manager of his company, the Petitioner 
proposes to lead and expand it by utilizing his expertise and related technologies in serving all potential 
customers, including small and mid-sized businesses. He also asserts he will introduce "avant-garde," 
"innovative," and "highly effective" digital marketing strategies as well as "novel techniques" that 
"could revolutionize" the marketing industry, further promising his company's and its clientele's 
competitive edge. However, the record does not contain specific detail or relevant probative evidence 
as to the innovative and novel methods that the Petitioner claims will set his proposed endeavor apart 
from other existing business models and practices in the field. The record also lacks evidence that his 
claimed methods and techniques were or would be recognized or adopted by the industry or otherwise 
have far-reaching implications. Although we acknowledge that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor 
could have a positive impact on his online marketing career and business, he has not persuasively 
explained, and the record (primarily including his business plan, an expert letter, other support letters, 
and the general industry reports) does not demonstrate how his proposed work would have the broader 
implications for the industry and U.S. economy as he claims, beyond his business and potential clients. 
The Petitioner further reiterates that his company will design and provide online courses and seminars 
and he will also regularly train his own employees. It is unclear, however, how the proposed 
educational component specifically relates to the claimed national importance of the Petitioner's 
proposed digital marketing endeavor, which, as he described, primarily proposes to advance and 
expand his online marketing business as a digital marketing expert. Even if his endeavor includes this 
educational component, the record lacks probative evidence that providing online courses and training 
would impact digital marketing education more broadly beyond his own employees and customers. 
Similarly, in Dhanasar, the petitioner's work as a science teacher, while it was found to have 
substantial merit, did not qualify him under the first prong because the record did not establish how 
that work would impact science education more broadly. Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 893. 
The record also does not show that the proposed endeavor would have "significant potential to employ 
U.S. workers" or "substantial positive economic effects, particularly in an economically depressed 
area," which may indicate national importance. Id. at 890. The Petitioner's business plan includes a 
personnel chart and a five-year plan listing him as owner, general manager, and a senior consultant of 
his company, initially with nine employees comprising consultants, specialists, managers, and a 
content writer; and by year five, a total of 13 employees. The business plan also projects, based on its 
own sales forecast, $535,000 in total sales revenue in year one and a total revenue of over $3.3 million 
by year five with remaining net profit of around $1 million after taxes and expenses. However, these 
projection lack corroborating evidence that would objectively substantiate them, and the record does 
not show how he will specifically achieve them. While the business plan also includes organizational 
plans and duty descriptions, the record does not include any evidence-based justifications for the 
increasing staffing projections and the claimed need for business expansion beyond California. Even 
assuming the job and profits projections are accurate, he has not shown that the economic benefits to 
the regional or national economy and the projected employment resulting from the endeavor would 
reach the level of "substantial positive economic effects" as contemplated by Dhanasar. Id. at 890. 
3 
Although he also claims that his business will be located in a "historically underutilized business zone" 
("HUBZone"), he does not specify his company's location and the business plan simply states that it 
will be located in and serve "thel IMetropolitan Area." Moreover, as the Director noted, 
it is unclear how HUBZones are identified and whether they necessarily include or impact 
economically depressed areas. Other than his general assertions as to HUBZones, the record does not 
contain independent evidence indicating that his proposed work would directly or indirectly benefit 
economically depressed areas. Even assuming the accuracy of the projected sales figures, the record 
does not show that the resulting positive economic effects would be substantial, particularly in an 
economically depressed area. He also continues to rely on economic activity "multiplier" models, 
reasserting that his company will indirectly generate 156 jobs and other indirect ripple effects through 
residual economic activities. But the record does not contain any probative evidence that the claimed 
indirect economic impact would be directly attributable to the Petitioner's proposed endeavor. He 
further asserts the projected tax contributions to local, state, and federal governments "will obviously 
broadly enhance societal welfare" by increasing overall tax revenues for this country and indirectly 
creating new jobs as well as other unspecified benefits. However, apart from these assertions, it is 
unclear, and the record lacks evidence as to, how the speculated tax contributions and related economic 
and social benefits, even if accurately projected, would improve societal welfare at a regional or 
national level on a scale commensurate with national importance as contemplated in Dhanasar. 
Lastly, the Petitioner reiterates that his company "will operate in" a science, technology, engineering, 
and mathematics ("STEM") field. But he does not specifically claim that his proposed endeavor itself, 
which is primarily entrepreneurial and service-oriented in nature, is inherently a STEM enterprise. 
The record does not otherwise contain any persuasive explanation or specific evidence that his 
proposed endeavor in online digital marketing in fact falls within a STEM field that has national 
importance. See Matter ofChawathe, 25 I&N Dec. at 375-76 (stating that petitioners bear the burden 
of establishing their eligibility); see also 6 USCIS Policy Manual F.5(D)(2), 
https://www.uscis.gov/policymanual (stating that with respect to the first prong, as in all cases, the 
evidence still must show that a STEM endeavor has both substantial merit and national importance). 
Here, as discussed, the Petitioner's assertions and reliance on his aspirational business plan, support 
letters, and general industry reports, do not demonstrate that his proposed endeavor as a marketing 
entrepreneur and consultant has broader implications for the online digital marketing and related 
education industries, or that it specifically furthers STEM objectives in a nationally significant manner, 
or otherwise demonstrate national importance as contemplated by Dhanasar. 
While we acknowledge his desire to contribute to the U.S. online digital marketing industry and its 
economy, the Petitioner has not established with specific, probative evidence that his proposed 
endeavor will have broader implications in his field, have significant potential to employ U.S. workers, 
or have substantial positive economic or societal effects. The Petitioner has not met Dhanasar' s 
national importance prong and thus has not established his eligibility for a national interest waiver. 
As the identified ground for denial, the Petitioner's inability to satisfy Dhanasar's first prong is 
dispositive of this appeal, we do not address here the Director's determinations as to the second and 
third Dhanasar prongs for a national interest waiver. See INS v. Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. 24, 25 (1976) 
(stating that agencies are not required to reach issues that are unnecessary to the ultimate decision). 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
4