dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Education

(b)(6)
DATE: MAR t 8 201+ Office: TEXAS SERVICE CENTER 
INRE: 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
U.S. Citizensh ip and Immigr ation Services 
Office of Admini strati ve Appeals 
20 Massachusetts Ave. , N.W. , MS 2090 
Washington, DC 20529-2090 
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
PETITION: Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker as a Member of the Professions Holding an Advanced 
Degree or an Alien of Exceptional Ability Pursuant to Section 203(b)(2) of the Immigration 
and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(2) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
SELF- REPRESENTED 
INSTRUCTIONS: 
Enclosed please find the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) in your case. 
This is a non-precedent decision. The AAO does not announce new constructions of law nor establish agency 
policy through non-precedent decisions . If you believe the AAO incorrectly applied current law or policy to 
your case or if you seek to present new facts for consideration, you may file a motion to reconsider or a 
motion to reopen, respectively. Any motion must be filed on a Notice of Appeal or Motion (Form I-290B) 
within 33 days of the date of this decision. Please review the Form I-290B instructions at 
http:ijwww.uscis.gov /forms for the latest information on fee, filing location, and other requirements. 
See also 8 C.F.R. § 103.5 . Do not file a motion directly with the AAO. 
Thank you, 
;;;::ZJ; 
Ron Rosenb erg 
Chief, Administrative Appeals Office 
www.uscis.gov 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The Director, Texas Service Center, denied the immigrant visa petition and the 
matter is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The appeal will be 
dismissed. 
The petitioner seeks classification under section 203(b)(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the 
Act), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b )(2), as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree. 1 According to 
Part 6 of the Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker, the petitioner seeks employment as a 
special education teacher. The petitioner has worked for . ) since 
June 2007. At the time of filing, the petitioner was teaching at I for 
The petitioner asserts that an exemption from the requirement of a job offer, and thus of a labor 
certification, is in the national interest of the United States. The director found that the petitioner did 
not qualify for classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree , and that the 
petitioner had not established that an exemption from the requirement of a job offer would be in the 
national interest of the United States. · 
On appeal, the petitioner submits additional documentary evidence and a statement in Part 3 of the 
Form I-290B , Notice of Appeal or Motion, contesting the director's decision. In her statement, the 
petitioner asserts that she "has more than five years of progressive post baccalaureate experience in 
the specialty" and that her role with serves the national interest. 
Section 203(b) of the Act states, in pertinent part: 
(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) ... the 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. 
The regulation at 8 C.P.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(i) states: 
1 The petit ioner was initially represented by attorney. 
shall refer to 
In this decision, the term "previous counsel' 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 3 
To show that the alien is a professional holding an advanced degree, the petition must be 
accompanied by: 
(A) An official academic record showing that the alien has an United States advanced 
1 degree or a foreign equivalent degree; or 
(B) An official academic record showing that the alien has a United States baccalaureate 
degree or a foreign equivalent degree, and evidence in the form of letters from current or 
former employer(s) showing that the alien has at least five years of progressive post­
baccalaureate experience in the specialty. 
The petitioner submitted evidence that she received a Bachelor of Science degree in Psychology 
from the in 2003. The petitioner also submitted a 
January 16, 2012 "Expert Opinion Evaluation" report prepared by Professor of 
Operations Management and Management Science, stating that the 
petitioner has "at least seven years of post-baccalaureate progressive work experience in education ." 
The director found that the petitioner had not established she has progressive post-baccalaureate 
experience equivalent to an advanced degree under the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services 
(USCIS) regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(i)(B). Specifically, the director stated that the 
petitioner had not demonstrated "five years of progressive post-baccalaureate experience in the 
specialty." The petitioner, however, submitted various letters from staff and other 
documentary evidence indicating that she has been employed by ~ ~ as a teacher since 2007. On 
appeal, the petitioner submits a "Letter of Employment Verification" from and Form W-2 
Wage and Tax Statements for for 2007 through 2012. In addition, the petitioner previously 
submitted a letter from 
_ stating that the petitioner worked as a kindergarten teacher at the 
"from May 2005 until April 2006." The petitioner also submitted certificates of 
participation and attendance for professional development courses that she completed in 
and the Philippines from 2005 through 2010. The letters from staff and the numerous 
professional development certificates the petitioner submitted are sufficient to demonstrate her 
advancing levels of responsibility and knowledge as an educator. As the evidence the petitioner 
submitted establishes that she has more than five years of progressive post-baccalaureate experience 
in teaching, the director's finding is withdrawn. The petitioner therefore qualifies as a member of the 
professions with progressive post-baccalaureate experience equivalent to an advanced degree. 
The remaining issue to be determined is whether the petitioner has established that a waiver of the job 
offer requirement, and thus a labor certification, is in the national interest. Neither the statute nor the 
pertinent regulations define the term "national interest." Additionally, Congress did not provide a 
specific definition of "in the national interest." The Committee on the Judiciary merely noted in its 
report to the Senate that the committee had "focused on national interest by increasing the number and 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 4 
proportion of visas for immigrants who would benefit the United States economically and · 
otherwise .... " S. Rep. No. 55, lOlst Cong., 1st Sess., 11 (1989). 
A supplementary notice regarding the regulations implementing the Immigration Act of 1990, P.L. 
101-649, 104 Stat. 4978 (Nov. 29, 1990) (IMMACT90), published at 56 Fed. Reg. 60897, 60900 (Nov. 
29, 1991), states, in pertinent part: 
The Service believes it appropriate to leave the application of this test as flexible as 
possible, although clearly an alien seeking to meet the [national interest] standard must 
make a showing significantly above that necessary to prove the "prospective national 
benefit" [required of aliens seeking to qualifY as "exceptional."] The burden will rest 
with the alien to establish that exemption from, or waiver of, the job offer will be in the 
national interest. Each case is to be judged on its own merits. 
In reNew York State Dept of Transportation, 22 I&N Dec. 215, 217-18 (Act. Assoc. Comm'r 1998) 
(NYSDOT), has set forth several factors which must be considered when evaluating a request for a 
national interest waiver. First, a petitioner must establish that she seeks employment in an area of 
substantial intrinsic merit. !d. at 217. Next, a petitioner must establish that the proposed benefit will be 
national in scope. !d. Finally, the petitioner seeking the waiver must establish that she will serve the 
national interest to a substantially greater degree than would an available U.S. worker having the same 
minimum qualifications. !d. at 217-18. 
The petitioner has established that her work as an elementary school special education teacher is in 
an area of substantial intrinsic merit. It remains, then, to determine whether the proposed benefits of 
the petitioner ' s work will be national in scope and whether she will benefit the national interest to a 
greater extent than an available U.S. worker with the same minimum qualifications. 
While the national interest waiver hinges on prospective national benefit, the petitioner must establish 
her past record justifies projections of future benefit to the national interest. !d. at 219. The petitioner's 
subjective assurance that she will, in the future, serve the national interest cannot suffice to establish 
prospective national benefit. The inclusion of the tenn "prospective" is used here to require future 
contributions by the petitioner, rather than to facilitate the entry of an individual with no demonstrable 
prior achievements , and whose benefit to the national interest would thus be entirely speculative. !d. 
Eligibility for the waiver must rest with the petitioner's own qualifications rather than with the 
position sought. Assertions regarding the overall importance of a petitioner's area of expertise 
cannot suffice to establish eligibility for a national interest waiver. !d. at 220. Moreover , it cannot 
suffice to state that the petitioner possesses useful skills, or a "unique background. " Special or 
unusual knowledge or training does not inherently meet the national interest threshold. The issue of 
whether similarly-trained workers are available in the United States is an issue under the jurisdiction 
of the U.S. Department of Labor through the alien employment certification process . I d. at 221. 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 5 
The petitiOner filed the Form I-140 petition on June 19, 2012. In a June 14, 2012 letter 
accompanying the petition, previous counsel stated that the petitioner's national interest waiver "is 
premised on her bachelor's degree in Psychology plus at least eight (8) years of progressive 
professional experience as Special Education teacher, the recognition and grants earned through her 
diligent efforts . . . and testimonials from superiors and colleagues." Academic degrees , 
occupational experience, and recognition for achievements are elements that can contribute toward a 
finding of exceptional ability. See 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(ii)(A), (B), and (F), respectively. 
Exceptional ability, in turn, is not a self-evident ground for the waiver. See section 203(b )(2)(A) ·of 
the Act. The USCIS regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2) defines "exceptional ability" as "a degree 
of expertise significantly above that ordinarily encountered" in a given area of endeavor. By statute, 
aliens of exceptional ability are generally subject to the job offer/labor certification requirement; 
they are not exempt by virtue of their exceptional ability. NYSDOT at 218, 222. Therefore, whether 
a given individual seeks classification as an alien of exceptional ability, or as a member of the 
professions holding an advanced degree, that individual cannot qualify for a waiver just by 
demonstrating a degree of expertise significantly above that ordinarily encountered in her field of 
expertise. The national interest waiver is an additional benefit, separate from the classification 
sought, and therefore eligibility for the underlying classification does not demonstrate eligibility for 
the additional benefit of the waiver. 
In his letter accompanying the petition, previous counsel did not mention the NYSDOT guidelines or 
explain how the petitioner meets them. The record does not show how the petitioner's work will 
impact the field beyond With regard to the petitioner's teaching duties, there is no evidence 
establishing that the benefits of her work would extend beyond her elementary school students such 
that they will have a national impact. NYSDOT provides examples of employment where the 
benefits would not be national in scope: 
For instance, pro bono legal services as a whole serve the national interest, but the impact of 
an individual attorney working pro bono would be so attenuated at the national level as to be 
negligible. Similarly, while education is in the national interest, the impact of a single 
schoolteacher in one elementary school would not be in the national interest for purposes of 
waiving the job offer requirement of section 203(b )(2)(B) of the Act. As another example, 
while nutrition has obvious intrinsic value, the work of one cook in one restaurant could not 
be considered sufficiently in the national interest for purposes of this provision of the Act. 
!d. at 217, n.3. In the present matter, the petitioner has not shown the benefits of her impact as a 
special education teacher beyond the students at her school and, therefore, that her proposed benefits 
are national in scope. In addition, the record lacks specific examples of how the petitioner's work as a 
special educator has influenced the field on a national level. At issue is whether this petitioner's 
contributions in the field are of such significance that she merits the special benefit of a national 
interest waiver, a benefit separate and distinct from the visa classification she seeks. A petitioner 
must demonstrate a past history of achievement with some degree of influence on the field as a 
whole. !d. at 219, n. 6. 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 6 
The petitioner submitted various letters of support from administrators, school staff, and parents 
discussing her work as a teacher. As some of the letters contain similar claims addressed in other 
letters, not every letter will be quoted. Instead, only selected examples will be discussed to illustrate 
the nature of the references' claims. 
In her April 20131etter, 
stated: 
Managing Principal , 
I have known [the petitioner] for approximately seven years, during which time I have served 
as her immediate supervisor. Throughout this period, [the petitioner] has consistently 
demonstrated a conscientiousness and genuine commitment to the students at 
Elementary students [sic]. [The petitioner], currently serves as a Resource Teacher , 
providing special education services to all students in grades Kindergarten through 2. During 
her tenure at · [the petitioner], has utilized the Maryland State Curriculum and 
students' Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) to teach them at their instructional 
levels. [The petitioner] utilizes data to drive instruction; differentiates instruction based on 
the noted accommodations and modifications as outlined in the IEP, in addition to, student 
readiness levels and learning styles. She is also responsible for documenting student 
progress. 
[The petitioner] also serves as the Literacy representative for our school. Her additional 
responsibilities include: providing professional development for teachers regarding system 
initiatives and programs, ensuring our school completes district-mandate[ d] assessments in a 
timely manner, supporting the Managing Principal in analyzing data to make instructional 
decisions, and assumes other duties as assigned in a manner of excellence. 
(The petitioner] performs in a proficient manner in her current assignment. She collaborates 
with her colleagues , attends professional development sessions , submits the required 
documentation in a timely manner, and has a good rapport with students, parents, and 
colleagues. 
comments on the petitioner's job responsibilities and proficiency as a teacher, but does not 
indicate how the petitioner's impact or influence as a teacher is national in scope. In addition, Ms. 
- fails to provide specific examples of how the petitioner's work has influenced the field as a 
whole. 
, stated: 
I have known [the petitioner] for the past 6 years in my capacity as Professional Developer at 
where she has worked full-time as a 
Primary Special Educator. [The petitioner's] punctuality and attendance have been superior. 
She has a superior work ethic and is well liked by our staff and students. Working with our 
youngest students that have a broad range of learning and/or behavioral disabilities requires a 
teacher that is patient, knowledgeable and compassionate to their needs. 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 7 
* * * 
Some of her duties here at include: 
• Working with students on a daily basis, both in the classroom setting or in a small group 
• Testing students and completing detailed reports on the results of the assessments 
• Participating in weekly Child Study Team meetings with parents and other team members 
• Completing all student reports in a timely manner and entering the data into Maryland 
On-line Data System 
• Maintaining daily lesson plans and data reports on students in her caseload 
• Maintaining a model classroom 
(The petitioner] has also developed strong relationships with the parents of her students and 
works with them in school on strategies to support their students at home. She has 
outstanding communication skills and is always positive in her interactions with everyone at 
_ She also serves in the capacity of Literacy Representative for 
the school where she attends monthly meetings and then supports the staff by providing 
information and/or professional development relating to the Literacy Framework for 
instruction and oversees the on-line data monitoring for our school using the Wireless 
Generation Assessment Program. (The petitioner] has also served in the capacity of Co­
Testing Coordinator for the past two years. 
points to the petitioner's punctuality, superior attendance, patience, knowledge , 
compassion, teaching duties, strong parental relationships, communication skills, and service as 
Literacy Representative and Co-Testing Coordinator , but does not indicate that the petitioner's work 
has had, or will continue to have, an impact beyond and 
(The petitioner] serves as a Special Educator for grades PK-2 in our school, 
_ Over the school year that I have worked with her, she has demonstrated 
excellent relations with both her students and colleagues. She submits her reports and 
documentation in a timely manner, and is always in communication with parents regarding 
their children ' s performance. She strives to help her students achieve their academic and IEP 
goals. I have noticed her diligent efforts in providing accommodations and supplementary 
aids as needed by her students with disabilities. Her attitude at work is always professional. 
points to the petitioner's positive relationships with students and staff, promptness in 
submitting reports and documentation, consistency in communicating with parents about student 
performance, efforts to help students reach their goals, and professional attitude, but her observations 
fail to demonstrate that the petitioner's work has influenced the field as whole, or that the petitioner 
has or will benefit the United States to a greater extent than other similarly · qualified special 
education teachers. 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 8 
Resource Special Educator, Yorkwood Elementary School, stated: 
I have worked with [the petitioner] for the past two years here in _ 
School. I have known her as our school's Inclusion teacher and Resource Special Educator 
for the primary levels. 
Over the past two years, [the petitioner] has had the wonderful opportunity to instruct a 
diverse group of preschool and elementary students. She demonstrates effective teaching 
techniques and instructional methods. She educates all types of learners, and fosters a fun 
and engaging learning environment, all of which comply with MSDE [Maryland Stated 
Department of Education] standards. One of her greatest strengths as an educator is meeting 
each student's unique needs by developing a personal understanding of each one of them. 
She achieves this by seeing and assessing students as individuals. 
comments on the petitioner's effectiveness as an educator and ability to develop a 
personal understanding of her students, but her observations fail to demonstrate that the petitioner ' s 
work has had an impact beyond - or has otherwise influenced the field 
as a whole. 
The preceding references praise the petitioner's abilities as a special education teacher and personal 
character, but they do not demonstrate that the petitioner 's work has had an impact or influence 
outside of the school where she has taught. They also do not address the NYSDOT guidelines which, 
as published precedent, are binding on all USCIS employees. See 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(c). That 
decision cited school teachers as an example of a profession in a field with overall national 
importance (education), but in which individual workers generally do not produce benefits that are 
national in scope. NYSDOT at 217, n.3. 
In addition to the reference letters, the petitioner submitted the following: 
1. A "2012 Outstanding Teacher " certificate from the administration of m 
recognition of outstanding service to her students; 
2. An "Honor Graduates " list from the indicating that she 
graduated 
3. A Certificate of Appreciation from the 
- T -- ~ 
T T.., TTT during the 2002-2003 school 
year; 
4. A certificate from the recognizing the petitioner for having taken the "Oath of 
Office" as Secretary General of the (2002); 
5. A certificate from the recognizing the petitioner for having taken the "Oath of a 
Full-Fledge Junior Jaycee" (2002); 
6. A Certificate of Participation from the or her "presence during the Pari iamentary 
Procedure Seminar" (1999); 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 9 
7. A Certificate of Recognition from the 
"leadership in organizing the 
8. A May 3, 2011 letter of appreciation from the 
petitioner for her "dedication to the youth of l 
9. A May 2009 letter of appreciation from the _ -- ~ ------
-
@_03); 
thanking the petitioner for ' -----
10. A Certificate of Appreciation from the principal of 
dedicated service to our students" (20 1 0); 
11. Earnings statements; 
12. Maryland Educator Certificates; 
for 
thanking the 
"for 
13. A "Professional Teacher" certificate from the Republic of the Philippines, Professional 
Regulation Commission, Board for Professional Teachers; 
14. A "Professional Identification Card" from the Republic of the Philippines, Professional 
Regulation Commission, Manila; 
15. A "Certification of Good Standing" from the Republic of the Philippines, Professional 
Regulation Commission, Manila; 
16. A "Complete Listing of Those Who Passed Licensure Exam for Teachers" in the j 
identifying the petitioner among thousands of individuals who attained their 
elementary level license (October 10, 2005); 
17. A Praxis Series Examinee 
Score Report: 
18. A Certificate of Membership for the 
, Manila, Philippines; 
19. Academic records and transcripts; and 
20. Employment verifications. 
Again, academic records, occupational experience, professional certifications, salary information, 
membership in professional associations, and recognition for achievements are all elements that can 
contribute toward a finding of exceptional ability, but exceptional ability is not sufficient to establish 
eligibility for the national interest waiver. The plain language of section 203(b )(2)(A) of the Act 
indicates that aliens of exceptional ability are subject to the job offer requirement (including labor 
certification). NYSDOT at 218, 222. Particularly significant awards may serve as evidence of the 
petitioner's impact and influence on her field, but the petitioner has failed to demonstrate that the 
awards she received (items 1 - 10) have more than local, regional, or institutional significance. 
There is no documentary evidence showing that items 1 through 20 are indicative of the petitioner's 
influence on the field of education at the national level. 
The petitioner submitted various certificates of participation and attendance for training courses and 
seminars relating to her professional development. While taking courses and attending seminars are 
ways to increase one's professional knowledge and to improve as a teacher, there is nothing inherent 
in these activities to establish eligibility for the national interest waiver. 
In addition, the petitioner submitted copies of her Annual Evaluation Reports, Performance Review 
Reports, and Formal Observation Reports from - The petitioner, 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 10 
however, failed to demonstrate how the evaluations reflect that she has impacted the field to a 
substantially greater degree than other similary qualified educators and how her specific work has had 
significant impact outside of the institutions where she has taught. 
The petitioner submitted documentation indicating that she received 
with matching gifts from the 
The funded classroom projects included ' 
· ,"and' . 
donations through 
In addition, the petitioner submitted documentation showing that she was among thirteen 
educators from .>. VUU> V~ ~ ~·~u·~•·•-•.; --- - . • o • 
Facilitators on November 1st and 3rct, 2010. The petitioner, however, does not explain how the 
submitted documentation demonstrates her influence on the field as a whole. 
The petitioner submitted President George H.W. Bush's "Remarks on Signing the Immigration Act 
of 1990"; information about Public Law 94-142; an article in Encyclopedia of the Supreme Court of 
the United States about Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483 (1954); a copy of Section 1119 
of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLBA); a statement by U.S. Secretary of Education Arne 
Duncan on the National Assessment of Educational Progress Reading and Math 2011 Results; a 
September 26, 2011 article in Education Week entitled "Shortage of Special Education Teachers 
Includes Their Teachers" ; an article entitled "Supporting Science , Technology , Engineering, and 
Mathematics Education - Reauthorizing the Elementary and Secondary Education Act"; "Barack 
Obama on Education" questions and answers posted at www.ontheissues.org; information about 
STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) fields printed from the online 
encyclopedia Wikipedia; an article entitled "STEM Sell: Are Math and Science Really More 
Important Than Other Subjects?"; a report entitled "Special Education Teacher Retention and 
Attrition: A Critical Analysis of the Literature"; an abstract for a report entitled "SPeNSE: Study of 
Personnel Needs in Special Education"; an article in the Wall Street Journal entitled "The 
Importance of Math & Science in Education"; an article in Computer Science Technology entitled 
"Importance of Science and Math Education"; and the written testimony of Microsoft's Bill Gates 
before the Committee on Science and Technology of the United States House of Representatives 
(March 12, 2008). As previously discussed, general arguments or information regarding the 
importance of a given field of endeavor, or the urgency of an issue facing the United States, cannot 
by themselves establish that an individual benefits the national interest by virtue of engaging in the 
field. NYSDOT at 217. Such assertions and information address only the "substantial intrinsic 
merit" prong ofNYSDOTs national interest test. None of the preceding documents demonstrate that 
the petitioner ' s specific work as an elementary school special education teacher has affected the field 
as a whole. 
The director denied the petition on August 21, 2013. The director indicated that the petitioner had not 
shown that the proposed benefits of her work as a teacher will be national in scope. The director also 
determined that the petitioner had not demonstrated that she will benefit her field to a greater extent than 
would an available U.S. worker having the same minimum qualifications, or that her work has 
otherwise influenced the field as a whole. The director therefore concluded that the petitioner failed to 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 11 
establish that an exemption from the requirement of a job offer would be in the national interest of the 
United States. 
On appeal, the petitioner submits three additional letters of support from 
School staff. 
In her September 16, 2013 letter, · ·tates: 
[The petitioner] is an exemplary special educator, she differentiates instruction to meet the 
needs of our diverse learners, assesses students and recommends strategies to support their 
learning in school and in the home. She provides consultation services to the regular 
educators in our school. As there is a national shortage of special educators, particularly 
those who choose to work in urban settings , [the petitioner's] work is instrumental in closing 
the achievement gap for Mrican American students who are also counted in the special 
education and Title I sub-groups .... Our school has experienced the shortage in special 
educators as we currently have substitute teachers working as special education resource 
teachers, supporting the need for us to retain highly qualified educators , such as [the 
petitioner]. 
mentions the petitioner's teaching duties at . nd comments 
on the "shortage of special educators" nationally and in urban areas. However, the unavailability of 
qualified U.S. workers or the amelioration of local labor shortages are not considerations in national 
interest waiver determinations because the alien employment certification process is already in place 
to address such shortages. !d. at 218. Again, the issue of whether similarly-trained workers are 
available in the U.S. is an issue under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Department of Labor through the 
alien employment certification process. !d. at 221. 
states: 
When our country adopted the No Child Left Behind legislation, the goal was by 2014 to 
have all children reading by grade 3 -in each state, in each school district, in each school, in 
each classroom, but where do you begin to make that kind of national impact? The answer is 
that it begins with each teacher working with each student to help them reach their individual 
potential and become productive responsible citizens of this great nation. 
With regard to the national impact of the petitioner's work, asserts that achieving the 
NCLBA reading goal "begins with each teacher working with each student to help them reach their 
individual potential." However, as previously discussed, NYSDOT specifically identified an 
elementary school teacher as an example of an occupation where the individual worker would not 
produce benefits that are national in scope. See NYSDOT at 217, n.3. With regard to following the 
guidelines set forth in NYSDOT, by law, the USCIS does not have the discretion to ignore binding 
precedent. See 8 C .P.R. § 103.3(c). Ms. Allen's observations do not establish that the NCLBA has 
modified or superseded NYSDOT , and she identifies no specific legislative or regulatory provisions 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 12 
that exempt school teachers from NYSDOT or reduce its impact on them. In contrast, section 5 of 
the Nursing Relief for Disadvantaged Areas Act of 1999, Pub. L. 106-95 (November 12, 1999), 
specifically amended the Act by adding section 203(b)(2)(B)(ii) to create special waiver provisions 
for certain physicians. Congress not only can amend the Act to clarify the waiver provisions, but has 
in fact done so in direct response to NYSDOT. The petitioner, however, has not shown that the 
NCLBA contains a similar legislative change. 
';:::========-. Instructional Team Associate and Individualized Education Program Chairperson , 
. , points to President Barack Obama's call for universal 
preschool, the importance of certified early childhood programs as a solution for reversing poor 
student achievement, and how improving early childhood education will help to increase the 
qualifications of U.S. military recruits and to prepare students for future roles 'in busine ss. However, 
assertions regarding the need for early childhood educational reform in the United States only 
address the "substantial intrinsic merit" prong of NYSDOT' s national interest test. _ 
observ ations fail to demonstr ate how the petitioner's specific work has influenc ed the field of special 
education as a whole. 
further states that "the work of [the petitioner] contributes greatly to our country's 
wellbeing, as directly impacting [sic] our national economy and global competitivenes s." However, 
does not explain how the actions of one elementary school special education teacher 
would contribute substantially to the national economy or U.S. global competitiv eness. Again, the 
impact of a single early childhood special educator is so attenuated in the field that it would not yield 
a national effect. See NYSDOT at 217, n.3. Moreover , there are no blanket waivers for early 
childhood special education teachers; users grants national interest waivers on a case-by-case basis, 
rather than establishing blanket waivers for entire fields of specialization. NYSDOT at 217. 
The Board of Immigration Appeals (BrA) has held that testimony should not be disregarded simply 
because it is "self-serving ." See , e.g. , Matt er of S-A -, 22 I&N Dec. 1328, 1332 (BIA 2000) (citing 
cases). The BIA also held, however: "We not only encourage , but require the introduction of 
corroborative testimonial and documentary evidence, where available. " Id. If testimonial evidence 
lacks specificity, detail , or credibility, there is a greater need for the petitioner to submit 
corroborative evidence. Matt er ofY-B- , 21 r&N Dec. 1136 (BIA 1998). 
The opinions of the petitioner's references are not without weight and have been considered above. 
users may, in its discretion, use as advisory opinions statements submitted as expert testimony. 
See Matter of Caron Int ernational , 19 r&N Dec. 791, 795 (Comm 'r 1988). However , USCIS is 
ultimately responsible for making the final detennination regarding an alien ' s eligibility for the 
benefit sought. !d. The submission ofletters of support from the petitioner's professional contacts is 
not presumptive evidence of eligibility; users may evaluate the content of those letters as to 
whether they support the alien ' s eligibility. See id. at 795-796 ; see also Matter of V-K- , 24 r&N 
Dec. 500, n.2 (BIA 2008) (noting that expert opinion testimony does not purport to be evidence as to 
"fact"). 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 13 
In in Part 3 of the Form I-290B, the petitioner asserts that she "is a dually certified, highly qualified 
educator who specializes in Special Education particularly in the field of Early Childhood. " Section 
9101(23) of the NCLBA defines the term "Highly Qualified Teacher." Briefly, by the statutory 
definition , a"Highly Qualified" elementary school teacher: 
• has obtained full State certification as a teacher or passed the State teacher licensing 
examination, and holds a license to teach in such State; 
• holds at least a bachelor's degree ; and 
• has demonstrated, by passing a rigorous State test, subject 
knowledge and teaching skills 
in reading, writing, mathematics, and other areas of the basic elementary school 
curriculum, or (in the case of experienced teachers not "new to the profession ") 
demonstrates competence in all the academic subjects in which the teacher teaches based 
on a high objective uniform State standard of evaluation. 
In addition, the petitioner previously submitted information from the U.S. Department of Labor's 
Occupational Outlook Handbook describing the minimum qualifications necessary to become a 
special education teacher: 
Public school teachers are required to have a least a bachelor's degree and a state-issued 
certification or license. 
* * * 
Education 
All states require public special education teachers to have at least a bachelor 's degree . Some 
of these teachers major in elementary education or a content area, such as math or chemistry, 
and minor in special education. Others get a degree specifically in special education . 
* * * 
Some states require special education teachers to earn a master's degree in special education 
after earning their teaching certification. 
* * * 
Licenses 
All states require teachers in public schools to be licensed. A license is frequently referred to 
as a certification. 
* * * 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 14 
Requirements for certification vary by state. However, all states require at least a bachelor 's 
degree. They also require completing a teacher preparation program and supervised 
experience in teaching, which is typically gained through student teaching. Some states 
require a minimum grade point average. 
Many states offer 
general special education licenses that allow teachers to work with students 
across a variety of disability categories. Others license different specialties within special 
education. 
Teachers are often required to complete annual professional development classes to keep 
their license. Most states require teachers to pass a background check. Some states require 
teachers to complete a master's degree after receiving their certification . 
Some states allow special education 
teachers to transfer their licenses from another state. 
However, some states require even an experienced teacher to pass their own licensing 
requirements. 
The petitioner has not established that the NCLBA's "Highly Qualified" standard involves 
requirements that are more stringent than those outlined in the Occupational Outlook Handbook, or 
that a public school could not obtain a labor certification for a "Highly Qualified " educator. The 
labor certification process outlines the minimum requirements for a job opportunity. It does not 
preclude the employer from hiring applicants that exceed the minimum qualifications for the 
position. Regardless, the inapplicability or unavailability of a labor certification cannot be viewed as 
sufficient cause for a national interest waiver; the petitioner still must demonstrate that she will serve 
the national interest to a substantially greater degree than do others in the same field. NYSDOT at 
218, n.5. 
The petitioner further states that "she serves in a Title I school ... where close to 100% of the 
students are African American" and that her work "closes the achievement gap of students in the 
most vulnerable parts of the country." The petitioner, however, has failed to establish that her 
efforts have significantly closed the achievement gap in or nationally. The national 
importance of "education" as a concept, or "educators" as a class, does not establish that the work of 
one teacher produces benefits that are national in scope. NYSDOT at 217, n.3. A local-scale 
contribution to an overall national effort does not meet the NYSDOT threshold. The aggregate 
national effect from thousands of teachers does not give national scope to the work of each 
individual teacher. 
A plain reading of the statute indicates that engaging in a profession (such as teaching) does not 
presumptively exempt such professionals from the requirement of a job offer based on national interest. 
The petitioner has not established that her past record of achievement is at a level sufficient to waive 
the job offer requirement which, by law, normally attaches to the visa classification sought by the 
petitioner. The petitioner need not demonstrate notoriety on the scale of national acclaim, but the 
national interest waiver contemplates that her influence be national in scope. NYSDOT at 217, n.3. 
(b)(6)
NON-PRECEDENT DECISION 
Page 15 
More specifically, the petitioner "must clearly present a significant benefit to the field of endeavor. " 
!d. at 218. See also id. at 219, n.6 (the alien must have "a past history of demonstrable achievement 
with some degree of influence on the field as a whole"). On the basis of the evidence submitted, the 
petitioner has not established that a waiver of the requirement of an approved labor certification will be 
in the national interest of the United States. 
In visa petition proceedings, it is the petitioner's burden to establish eligibility for the immigration 
benefit sought. Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361; Matter of Otiende, 26 I&N Dec. 127, 128 
(BIA 2013). Here, that burden has not been met. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.