dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Education

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
MATTER OF K-L-H-
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: MAR. 13,2018 
MOTION ON ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS OFFICE DECISION 
PETITION: FORM 1-140, IMMIGRANT PET,IT!ON FOR ALIEN WORKER 
The Petitioner, a teacher, 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 otTer 
requirement attached to this EB-2 classification. See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) 
section 203(b)(2); 8 U.S.C. § ll53(b)(2). After the petitioner has established eligibility for EB-2 
classification, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USC!S) may, as matter of discretion, 
grant a national interest waiver if the petitioner demonstrates: (l) 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. Malter of 
Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. 884 (AAO 20 16). 
The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien 
Worker, finding that the Petitioner qualified for classification as a member of the professions 
holding an advanced degree, but that he had not established that a waiver of the required job offer, 
and thus of the labor certification, would be in the national interest. The Petitioner appealed the 
matter to us, and we dismissed the appeal. 1 
The matter is now before us on a motion to reconsider. On motion, the Petitioner submits a brief and 
contends that his proposed endeavor is of national importance. Upon review, we will deny the motion. 
I. LAW 
A motion to reconsider is based on an incorrect application of law or policy. The requirements of a 
motion to a motion to reconsider are located at 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(3). 
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 
1 See Mauer of K-IA/-, ID# 478723 (AAO Sept. 22, 20 17). 
.
/'vfatter of K-L-H-
requires that the individual's services be sought by a U .S. employer, a separ ate showing is required 
to estab lish that a waiver of the j ob offe r requiremen t is in the national interest. 
Sectio n 203(b) of the Act sets out this seque ntial framework: 
(2) Aliens who are memb ers oft he professions holding advanced degrees or aliens of 
exceptional abil ity.-
(A) In general. - Visas shall be made available ... to qualified immigrants who 
are members of the pro fessions holding advanced degree s or their equivalent or 
who because of their excep tiona l ability in the sciences , arts, or business, will 
substantiall y benefit prospective ly the national economy , cultural or educa tional 
interests, or welfare of the United States , and whose services in the scie nces, arts, 
professions, or busin ess 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 science s, arts, 
professions, or business be sought by an employer in the United States. 
While neithe r the statute nor the pertine nt regul(:ltions define the term "natio nal int eres t," Dhanasar 
stated that after EB-2 eligibility has been established, USCIS may, as a matter of discretion , grant a 
national interest waiver if the petitioner demonstr ates by a prepo ndera nce of the evidence: (I) that 
the foreign national's propo sed endeavor has both substantial merit and national importance ; (2) that 
the fore ign national is well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor; and (3) that, on balance , it 
would be beneticial to the United States to waive the requirements of a job offer and thus of a labor 
certificat ion. 2 
II. ANALYSIS 
For purposes of a motion to reconsid er, the question is whether our decision was correct based on the 
record that existed at the time of adjudic ation. As discussed in our appellate decision, the Petitioner 
proposes to continue his work as a high schoo l English and language arts teacher at the 
in Arizona. In dismi ssing the appea l, we upheld the 
Director's fi nding that the Petitioner had not established that a waiver of the requirement of a job 
offer, and thus a labor certification, would be in the national intere st. Specific ally, we determined 
that the Petitioner had riot met the first prong set torth in the Dhan asar analytical framewo rk.3 We 
1 See Dlwna sar, 26 !&f\' Dec. at 888-91, for elaboration on these three prongs. 
:; As the Petitioner provided evidence that he is well positioned to advance his proposed endeavor of increasing his. 
student s' English language proficiency, we found that ~e satisfied the second prong of the Dhanasar framework. 
2 
.
Maller of K-L-H-
concluded that his proposed \vork teaching English in a charter high school classroom had substantial 
merit as·it provided valuable ed~cational benefits 'to his students, but that the prospective impact of his 
endeavor did not support a tlndi ng of national importance. 
On motion , the Petitioner maintains that his proposed endeavor is of national importance. He 
explains that his contribution to his students' English language proficiency helps them to "become 
productive citizens of the United States." In addition, the Petitioner contends that ensuring his 
students overcome the "language barrier in an English speaking country like the United States" 
creates "harmony among the people" and "leads to one strong and solid community." These 
arguments show the substantial merit of the Petitioner's proposed endeavor, but they are not sufficient 
to demonstrate that his specific teaching activities have national importance. 
In determining whether a proposed endeavor has national importance, we consider its potential 
prospective impact. The Petitioner asserts 
that his experience as a "highly qualified English teacher" 
in two ditlerent jurisdictions serves the "national priority goal of closing achievement gap" between 
advantaged and disadvantaged students. 4 The record, however, does not include evidence 
demonstrating that the Petitioner's ~ork toward closing the achievement gap stands to have positive 
cffect.s that reach beyond to affect his region or our nation more broadly. Contributing to a 
national educational goal does not render the work of an individual teacher nationally important under 
the Dhanasar framework. The value of qualified teachers to U.S. national educational initiatives is 
collective rath.er than specific to the Petitioner's proposed endeavor_ In Dhanasar, we determined that 
the petitioner's teaching activities did not rise to the level of having national importance because 
they would not impact his field more broadly. !d. at 893. 
The Petitioner's arguments do not establish that our appellate tindings were based on an incorrect 
application of the law, regulation, or Department of Homeland Security policy, nor does the motion 
demonstrate that our latest decision was erroneous based on the evidence before us at the time of the 
decision. While we acknowledge the merits of the Petitioner's work to improve the English 
language protl.ciency of his students at the evidence does not demonstrate that his 
instructional activities offer benefits that extend beyond his school or district to impact the fields of 
English language learning or alternative education more broadly. As the Petitioner has not shown 
that we erred in determining that his specific endeavor's prospective impact supports a finding of 
national importance, he has not met the requirements of a motion to reconsider. 
However, because the Petitioner had not established the national importance of his proposed endeavor as required by the 
first prong of the Dhanusar framework, we determined that he was not eligible for a national interest waiver and that 
further discussion oft he balancing factors under the third prong would serve no meaningful purpose. 
~ With respect to his teaching experience and qualifications, our appellate decision properly considered the Petitioner's 
skills, knowledge, and record of success as an educator under the second prong of the Dhanasar analysis - which 
focuses on the foreign national. We determined that he met that second prong of the framework. 
3 
Malter of K-L-H-
III. CONCLUSION 
The Petitioner's motion does. not demonstrate that our previous decision was incorrect, and it does 
not show that he has met the requisite three prongs set forth in the Dhanasar analytical framework. 
Accordingly, we tind that he has not established he is eligible for or otherwise merits a national 
interest waiver as a matter of discretion. 
ORDER: The motion to reconsider is denied. 
Cite as Maller ofK-L-H-, ID# I 102545 (AAO Mar. 13, 2018) 
4