dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Education

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: APR. 26, 2024 In Re: 23038296 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, a high school mathematics teacher, seeks classification as a member of the professions 
holding an advanced degree or of exceptional ability. 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 employment based second preference (EB-2) permanent 
immigrant classification. See section 203(b )(2)(B)(i) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1153(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. 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unpublished decision) in concluding that USCIS' decision to grant or deny a national interest waiver 
to be discretionary in nature). 
The Director of the Texas Service Center had initially granted the petition on the Petitioner's 
representation of their proposed endeavor to develop lesson plans incorporating online educational 
platforms prioritizing adaptive and flexible learning for students in different learning environments. 
But the Director revoked the approval of the petition because the Petitioner did not demonstrate the 
national importance of their proposed endeavor. 1 As such, the Director concluded the petition had 
been approved in error. 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. 
1 The Director also concluded the Petitioner did not demonstrate as described in the third prong of the analytical framework 
we first described in Matter ofDhanasar , 26 I&N Dec. 884 (AAO 2016) that, on balance , it would be beneficial to the 
United Stats to waive the requirement of a job offer, and thus of a labor certification. But, as our decision is dispositive of 
the Petitioner ' s appeal, we will not further address the Petitioner's assertions regarding their eligibility under Dhanasar's 
third prong and reserve the issue. 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 alternate issues on appeal where an applicant is otherwise ineligible). 
I. LAW 
USCIS may, at any time after granting a petition, revoke that approval for "good and sufficient cause" 
upon notice on any ground not specified in 8 C.F .R. § 205 .1 when the necessity for revocation comes 
to USCIS' attention. Section 205 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1155, 8 C.F.R. § 205.2. We evaluate the 
unrebutted and unexplained evidence supporting revocation in the record at the time a notice of intent 
to revoke (NOIR) is issued to determine whether "good and sufficient cause" for the revocation 
existed. See Matter ofEstime, 19 I&N Dec. 450, 451 (BIA 1987); see also Matter ofHo, 19 I&N Dec. 
at 590 ("The decision to revoke will be sustained where the evidence ofrecord at the time the decision 
is rendered, including any evidence or explanation submitted by the petitioner in rebuttal to the notice 
of intention to revoke, would warrant such denial."). The discovery of material facts and 
circumstances showing a petition was approved when it should not have been is good and sufficient 
cause for revoking the approval. See id, 19 I&N Dec. at 590. 
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. 
Whilst 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 I&N Dec. 884 (AAO 2016). Dhanasar states that USCIS may as a matter of discretion 
grant a national interest waiver of the job offer, and thus of the labor certification, to a petitioner 
classified in the EB-2 category if they demonstrate that (1) the noncitizen' s proposed endeavor has 
both substantial merit and national importance, (2) 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. 
The first prong, substantial merit and national importance, focuses on the specific endeavor 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. 
The second prong shifts the focus from the proposed endeavor to the noncitizen. To determine whether 
the noncitizen 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, progress towards achieving the proposed endeavor, and 
the interest of potential customers, users, investors, or other relevant entities or individuals are also 
key considerations. 
The third prong requires the petitioner to demonstrate that, on balance of applicable factors, it would 
be beneficial to the United States to waive the requirements of a job offer and thus of a labor 
certification. USCIS may evaluate factors such as whether, in light of the nature of the noncitizen' s 
qualification or the proposed endeavor, it would be impractical either for the noncitizen to secure a 
job offer or for the petition to obtain a labor certification; whether, even assuming that other qualified 
2 
U.S. workers are available, the United States would still benefit from the noncitizen's contributions; 
and whether the national interest in the noncitizen's contributions is sufficiently urgent to warrant 
forgoing the labor certification process. Each of the factors 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. 
II. ANALYSIS 
On appeal the Petitioner asserts that their proposed endeavor is a lesson plan that incorporates digital 
platforms 
and meets national standards. The Petitioner contends that their endeavor is nationally 
important because it has broad applications in different learning environments. The Petitioner states 
that their proposed endeavor addresses an underdeveloped area of digital learning, offers a means to 
maintain the quality of education between in-person and online mediums, and provides individualized 
instruction for students to promote overall success. 
Our authority over USCIS service centers, the office that adjudicated the immigrant petition, 1s 
comparable to the relationship between a court of appeals and a district court. So based on a de novo 
review we will adopt and affirm the Director's decision that the Petitioner did not demonstrate that 
their proposed endeavor had potential prospective impact rising to a level of national importance. See 
Matter of Burbano, 20 I&N Dec. 872,874 (BIA 1994); see also Prado-Gonzalez v. INS, 75 F.3d 631, 
632 (11th Cir. 1996) (joining "every court of appeals that has considered this issue" holding that an 
appellate body may affirm the lower court's decision for the reasons set forth therein); Giday v. INS, 
113 F.3d 230, 234 (D.C. Cir. 1997) (noting the practice of adopting and affirming the decision below 
has been "universally accepted by every other circuit that has squarely confronted the issue"). Below 
we provide individualized consideration to the Petitioner's appellate claims. 
As the Director correctly concluded, the Petitioner did not adequately demonstrate with material, 
relevant, or probative evidence that their proposed endeavor was nationally important. Much of the 
evidence the Petitioner did submit in their appeal pertains to their personal education, skills, 
knowledge, and record of success. But we do not evaluate the education, skills, knowledge, and record 
of success when considering the national importance of a petitioner's proposed endeavor.2 The 
Petitioner's endeavor is essentially a method to develop lessons plans for the educational instruction 
of students. The benefit of the lessons plans teachers develop are the students the teachers are teaching. 
As the Director insightfully observed, the Petitioner's has not adequately demonstrated the reach of 
the Petitioner's endeavor outside of their classroom. The Director is correct that we discussed in 
Dhanasar how teaching would not impact the field of education broadly in a manner which rises to 
national importance. Dhanasar at 893. The Petitioner's endeavor suffers from the same infirmity. 
Consequently, the record does not sufficiently support how the Petitioner's proposed endeavor has 
national or even global impact on the field of education. Nor does the record demonstrate any broader 
implications from the Petitioner's endeavor outside of the classroom or school system within which 
the Petitioner's proposed endeavor (i.e. their teaching opportunity) is housed. 
2 We tum to evaluate a petitioner's personal education, skills, knowledge, and record of success, model or plan for future 
activities, progress towards achieving the proposed endeavor, and the interest of potential customers, users, investors, or 
other relevant entities or individuals when considering how well-positioned a petitioner is to advance their proposed 
endeavor under the second prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework. 
3 
This is further underscored by the content of the letters of support the Petitioner submitted. The letter 
writers effusively described the positive impact of the Petitioner's lesson plans on their classroom. 
But letters did not adequately highlight any prospective potential national or global impact or broader 
implications of the proposed endeavor beyond the classroom. 
Consequently, the record as it is currently composed does not indicate that these prospective benefits 
of the Petitioner's proposed endeavor rose to a level of national importance either through 
demonstration of national or even global impact, broader implications influencing matters in the 
national interest, or any potential positive economic effects. 
III. CONCLUSION 
The Petitioner' appeal does not overcome the Director's well-reasoned determination that the 
Petitioner did not demonstrate their eligibility for a national interest waiver. Accordingly, we affirm 
the Director's decision to revoke the approval of the petition. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
4