dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Education

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: APR. 17, 2024 In Re: 30636201 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner seeks classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree. See 
Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 203(b )(2), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b )(2). The Petitioner 
also seeks a national interest waiver of the job offer requirement that is attached to this EB-2 immigrant 
classification. See section 203(b )(2)(B)(i) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1 l 53(b )(2)(B)(i). U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration Services (USCIS) may grant this discretionary waiver of the required job offer, and 
thus of a labor certification, when it is in the national interest to do so. 
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 the Petitioner 
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 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 I&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 a member of the professions holding an advanced 
degree 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. 
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 l&N Dec. 884 (AAO 2016). Dhanasar states that, after a petitioner has established 
eligibility for EB-2 classification, USCIS may, as a matter of discretion, grant a national interest 
waiver if the petitioner demonstrates: (1) that the noncitizen's proposed endeavor has both substantial 
merit and national importance; (2) that the noncitizen 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. 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). 
The first prong, substantial merit and national importance, focuses on the specific endeavor that the 
noncitizen 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. 
See Matter ofDhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 888-91, for elaboration on these three prongs. 
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 of a labor certification, would be in the national interest. 
For the reasons discussed below, the Petitioner has not established that a waiver of the requirement of 
a job offer is warranted. 
The Petitioner described the endeavor as a plan to found a "multicultural integration program to further 
promote the foreign languages training and knowledge of different cultures . . . focusing on the 
Hispanic community." The Petitioner submitted a business plan, which elaborates that the Petitioner's 
startup company would "operate as a cultural exchange after-school program where school-aged 
children will learn about other cultures and languages, complete their schoolwork, and develop their 
social skills." The plan indicates that, in addition to assisting attendees with their assigned homework, 
the startup company "will also teach children's classes about art, dance, and technology." The plan 
asserts the company "will offer competitive pricing as well as scholarships for students from low­
income families who are interested in the programs." The plan does not, however, clarify the location 
in which the startup company would operate, instead generally stating that the company "will target 
students through [sic] the U.S., including both bilingual students and students who only speak 
English." The plan asserts that the Petitioner would work as the company's "coordinator and 
facilitator," hiring one teacher and one driver in the first year of operation, for a total of three workers, 
increasing to a total of 15 workers, including four teachers and tutors, respectively, two drivers, and 
one administrative assistant, cleaner, counselor, and marketing specialist, respectively, by the fifth 
year of operation. 
We note that the Petitioner submitted a letter of interest from an individual who asserts she "worked 
for the I I Board of Education as a paraprofessional from April 2016 to [the time of writing 
in May 2023]." The letter expresses interest in "working with [the Petitioner] as soon as possible to 
install one of [her] programs in our school," located in I I New Jersey. However, we also 
note that the Petitioner informed USCIS in December 2023 that she relocated approximately 625 miles 
away from I I New Jersey, apparently indicating that she would not pursue the proposed 
endeavor at the location, raising questions again regarding where the Petitioner's startup company 
would be located. 
2 
The Director acknowledged that the proposed endeavor "to work as a coordinator and facilitator of a 
multicultural integration program ... has substantial merit." However, the Director observed that the 
record does not establish how the proposed endeavor would "sufficiently affect or advance the field 
or industry more broadly ( or has wider implications in the field) at a level commensurate with national 
importance." The Director also observed that the record does not establish how the proposed endeavor 
"would somehow offer the region or its population a substantial economic benefit through employment 
levels, business activity, trade, or related tax revenue." The Director noted that the Petitioner's focus 
on her prior academic and work history, and on generalized information regarding education, 
childcare, and bilingualism, does not address how the proposed endeavor may have national 
importance. Accordingly, the Director concluded that the record does not establish how the proposed 
endeavor may have national importance. The Director further concluded that the record does not 
satisfy the second or third Dhanasar prongs. See Matter ofDhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 888-91, for 
elaboration on these three prongs. 
On appeal, the Petitioner reasserts that the record establishes her proposed endeavor has national 
importance, specifically through the following evidence: the Petitioner's personal statements; the 
business plan, discussed above; publications providing generalized information regarding education, 
childcare, and bilingualism; and even more generally "[a]ll [e]vidence from [i]nitial [p]etition and 
RFE response." 
In determining national importance, the relevant question is not the importance of the industry, field, 
or profession in which an individual will work; instead, to assess national importance, we focus on 
"the specific endeavor that the [ noncitizen] proposes to undertake" and "we consider its potential 
prospective impact," looking for "broader implications." See Matter of Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 
889. Dhanasar provided examples of endeavors that may have national importance, as required by 
the first prong, having "national or even global implications within a particular field, such as those 
resulting from certain improved manufacturing processes or medical advances" or those with 
"significant potential to employ U.S. workers or ... other substantial positive economic effects, 
particularly in an economically depressed area." Id. at 889-90. 
We first note that information in the record-whether in the Petitioner's statements, the business plan, 
publications, or otherwise-that discusses the Petitioner's prior academic and work history pertains to 
whether the Petitioner is well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor, as contemplated by the 
second Dhanasar prong. See id. at 888-91. However, because the Petitioner's prior academic and 
work history does not inform how "the specific endeavor that the [ noncitizen] proses to undertake" 
may have "national or even global implications within a particular field, such as those resulting from 
certain improved manufacturing processes or medical advances" or broader implications, such as 
"significant potential to employ U.S. workers or ... other substantial positive economic effects, 
particularly in an economically depressed area," her prior academic and work history is immaterial to 
determining whether the specific, prospective, proposed endeavor may have national importance, as 
contemplated by the first Dhanasar prong. See id. at 889-90. 
We next note that generalized information in the record regarding education, childcare, and 
bilingualism-whether in the Petitioner's personal statements, the business plan, publications, or 
otherwise-pertains to issues such as whether the proposed endeavor has substantial merit, as 
contemplated by the first Dhanasar prong. See id. However, because the generalized information 
3 
does not inform how "the specific endeavor that the [ noncitizen] proses to undertake" may have 
"national or even global implications within a particular field, such as those resulting from certain 
improved manufacturing processes or medical advances" or broader implications, such as "significant 
potential to employ U.S. workers or ... other substantial positive economic effects, particularly in an 
economically depressed area," such generalized information does not establish how the specific 
proposed endeavor may have national importance, as contemplated by the first Dhanasar prong. See 
id. 
As the Director acknowledged, the Petitioner's personal statements, the business plan, and 
publications providing generalized information education, childcare, and bilingualism, addressed on 
appeal, establish that the proposed endeavor of operating a bilingual after-school program has 
substantial merit. However, the record in general-and specifically in the personal statements, the 
business plan, and the publications-does not establish how the potential prospective impact of the 
specific endeavor the Petitioner proposes to undertake may have the type of broader implications 
contemplated by the first Dhanasar prong. See id. The bilingual after-school program appears to 
benefit the Petitioner, her company, the school(s) with whom the Petitioner's company may 
participate, the children who may attend the after-school program, and their families. However, we 
note that the business plan's indication that four teachers and tutors, respectively, will provide the 
company's instructional and childcare services within the first five years of operation, is minimal and 
consistent with low anticipated participation within a limited area. Relatedly, the record does not 
establish how the employment of a total of 15 workers, including the Petitioner, in some unspecified 
location, demonstrates the type of broader implications like "significant potential to employ U.S. 
workers" or other substantial positive economic effects, as contemplated by Dhanasar. 
In tum, the record does not establish the particular location where the company would provide its 
services-whether inl INew Jersey, 625 miles away, or elsewhere-nor does it establish 
how many other after-school childcare programs in that unspecified location already provide bilingual 
services, in order to determine how novel the proposed endeavor may be. Regardless of the 
undetermined location where the proposed endeavor may operate, the record does not establish how 
the company's bilingual business model may have the type of broader implications within the field of 
after-school childcare-or any other field-"such as those resulting from certain improved 
manufacturing processes or medical advances," as contemplated by the first Dhanasar prong. See id. 
In summation, the Petitioner has not established that the proposed endeavor has national importance, 
as required by the first Dhanasar prong; therefore, she is not eligible for a national interest waiver. 
We reserve our opinion regarding whether the record satisfies the second or third Dhanasar prong. 
See INS v. Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. 24, 25 ( 1976) (stating that agencies are not required to make "purely 
advisory findings" on issues that are unnecessary to the ultimate decision); 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). 
4 
III. CONCLUSION 
As the Petitioner has not met the requisite first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework, we 
conclude that the Petitioner has not established eligibility for, or otherwise merits, a national interest 
waiver as a matter of discretion. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
5