dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Economics

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 14515184 
Appeal of Nebraska Service Center Decision 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: JUL. 14, 2021 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker (Advanced Degree, Exceptional Ability, National 
Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, an economist, seeks second preference 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 Nebraska Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the record did not 
establish that a waiver of that classification's job offer requirement, and thus of a labor certification, 
would be in the national interest. 
In these proceedings , it is the Petitioner's burden to establish eligibility for the requested benefit. 
Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S .C. § 1361. Upon de nova 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. Because this classification requires that the 
individual's services be sought by a U.S . employer, a separate showing is required to establish that a 
waiver of the job offer requirement is in the national interest. 
Section 203(b) of the Act sets out this sequential framework: 
(2) Aliens who are members of the professions holding advanced degrees or aliens of 
exceptional ability. -
(A) In general. - Visas shall be made available .. . to qualified immigrants who are 
members of the professions holding advanced degrees or their equivalent or 
who because of their exceptional ability in the sciences, arts, or business, will 
substantially benefit prospectively the national economy, cultural or 
educational interests, or welfare of the United States, and whose services in the 
sciences, arts, professions, or business are sought by an employer in the United 
States. 
(B) Waiver of job offer-
(i) National interest waiver. ... [T]he Attorney General may, when the 
Attorney General deems it to be in the national interest, waive the 
requirements of subparagraph (A) that an alien's services in the sciences, 
arts, professions, or business be sought by an employer in the United States. 
While neither the statute nor the pertinent regulations define the term "national interest," we set forth 
a framework for adjudicating national interest waiver petitions in the precedent decision Matter of 
Dhanasar, 26 r&N Dec. 884. Dhanasar states that after EB-2 eligibility has been established, users 
may, as a matter of discretion, grant a national interest waiver if the petitioner demonstrates: (1) that 
the foreign national's proposed endeavor has both substantial merit and national importance; (2) that 
the foreign national is well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor; and (3) that, on balance, it 
would be beneficial to the United States to waive the requirements of a job offer and thus of a labor 
certification. 1 
The first prong, substantial merit and national importance, focuses on the specific endeavor that the 
foreign national proposes to undertake. 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. 
The second prong shifts the focus from the proposed endeavor to the foreign national. To determine 
whether he or she is well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor, we consider factors including, 
but not limited to: the individual's education, skills, knowledge and record of success in related or 
similar efforts; a model or plan for future activities; any progress towards achieving the proposed 
endeavor; and the interest of potential customers, users, investors, or other relevant entities or 
individuals. 
The third prong requires the petitioner to demonstrate that, on balance, it would be beneficial to the 
United States to waive the requirements of a job offer and thus of a labor certification. In performing 
this analysis, users may evaluate factors such as: whether, in light of the nature of the foreign 
national's qualifications or the proposed endeavor, it would be impractical either for the foreign 
national to secure a job offer or for the petitioner to obtain a labor certification; whether, even assuming 
that other qualified U.S. workers are available, the United States would still benefit from the foreign 
1 To establish that it would be in the national interest to waive the job offer requirement, a petitioner must go beyond 
showing their expertise in a particular field. The regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2) defines ·'exceptional ability" as "a 
degree of expeitise significantly above that ordinarily encountered" in a given area of endeavor. By statute. individuals of 
exceptional ability are generally subject to the job offer/labor certification requirement; they are not exempt by virtue of 
their exceptional ability. Therefore, whether a given petitioner seeks classification as an individual of exceptional ability, 
or as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree, they must go beyond demonstrating a degree of expe1iise 
significantly above that ordinarily encountered in their field of expertise to establish eligibility for a national interest 
waiver. See Dhanasar, 26 l&N Dec. at 886 n.3. 
2 
national' s contributions; and whether the national interest in the foreign national' s contributions is 
sufficiently urgent to warrant forgoing the labor certification process. In each case, the factor(s) 
considered must, taken together, indicate that on balance, it would be beneficial to the United States 
to waive the requirements of a job offer and thus of a labor certification. 2 
II. ANALYSIS 
The Petitioner is an economist who has spent most of her career with departments of thd._ __ _. 
government, and has also served in facult ositions at three universities. She currently serves 
as President ofth ~-------------------' a think tank inc=] The record 
includes evidence that she obtained a master's degree in economic science from 
University inD in 1995, and a Ph.D. in economic science from the same institu .... t1-·o_n_i_n_2_0_0_6 ___ W_h_i_le_. 
the Director did not indicate in his decision whether the Petitioner was eligible for the EB-2 immigrant 
visa classification, on review we conclude that she qualifies as a member of the professions with an 
advanced degree. Therefore, the sole issue on appeal is whether she merits a waiver of the 
classification's job offer requirement under the framework laid out in Dhanasar. 
The Petitioner stated in her initial filing that her proposed endeavor was to "gain employment as an 
economist" with a department of the United States federal government or a research institution, and 
listed several government agencies and private institutions and universities as potential employers. In 
responding to the Director's request for evidence (RFE), which in part sought further information 
regarding her specific endeavor, the Petitioner indicated that her experience inl I I I program could be applied to welfare programs in the United States. She also states that 
as an economist with experience in thel I government and an economic think-tank, she could 
provide knowledge about and contribute to research of thel I economy that is rare within 
universities and think-tanks in the United States. 3 The Director concluded that the record established 
that the Petitioner met the first prong of the Dhanasar framework. However, after review, we disagree 
and withdraw that portion of the Director's decision. 
In support of the substantial merit of these endeavors, the Petitioner indicated that her endeavor would 
"relate to research and the furtherance of human knowledge in the field and application of Economics," 
and submitted articles describing the role of economists in public and private settings. This evidence 
is sufficient to show that her proposed employment as an economist would be of substantial merit. 
As for the national importance of her proposed endeavor, the Petitioner submitted a report from the 
Center on Budget and Policy Priorities which describes the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance 
Program (SNAP), administered by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), and its 
benefits to low-income households in the United States. Although this information shows that the 
2 See Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 888-91, for elaboration on these three prongs. 
3 On appeal, the Petitioner indicates that she could begin her endeavor in the United States by starting her own economic 
consulting firm, and submits a brief business plan as well as evidence of personal assets. However, where, as here, a 
Petitioner has been put on notice of a deficiency in the evidence and has been given an opportunity to respond to that 
deficiency, the AAO will not accept evidence offered for the first time on appeal. Matter of Soriano, 19 I&N Dec. 764 
(BIA 1988); Matter of Obaigbena, 19 I&N Dec. 533 (BIA 1988). We will therefore not consider this new addition to the 
Petitioner's proposed endeavor. 
3 
SNAP program is of national importance, as it "promotes long-term health and well-being" of 
recipients across the United States, the Petitioner does not specifically describe her work and its 
potential prospective impact to the field of economics or to SNAP or other welfare programs in the 
United States. In Dhanasar, we held that a petitioner must identify "the specific endeavor that the 
foleigl national proposes to undertake." Id. at 889. Here, the Petitioner refers to her previous work 
in and states that "such models" can be applied to welfare systems in the United States, but she 
does not describe the model she proposes to apply or how it would have broader implications. 
Further, regarding her proposal to "expands [sic] on the current understanding and provide better 
assessment of0economy" through employment with a university or think tank, the Petitioner did 
not submit evidence of how this work would be of national importance. She again refers to her 
previous experience, in this case with thd I but 
does not specifically describe this aspect of her proposed endeavor or how it would have a broader 
impact on the field of economics. We note that since the first prong looks to the potential prospective 
impact of her proposed endeavor, the information about her previous work is less relevant than a 
detailed description of her intentions for the future. In addition, while she indicated in her response to 
the Director's RFE that this aspect of her endeavor "seeks to have a "substantial positive economic 
effect,"" the record lacks evidence or an explanation of who would benefit from the effects of the 
Petitioner's employment as an economist at a university or think tank, or what form those effects 
would take. 
As the Petitioner has not established that her endeavor's prospective impact supports a finding of 
national importance, we conclude that she has not met the first prong of the Dhanasar framework. 
III. CONCLUSION 
The Petitioner has not met the requisite first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework. We 
therefore conclude that she has not established that 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. 
4