dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Electrical Engineering

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: JAN. 9, 2024 In Re: 29463978 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner seeks second preference immigrant classification as a member of the professions 
holding an advanced degree or as an individual of exceptional ability, as well as a national interest 
waiver of the job offer requirement attached to this EB-2 classification. Immigration and Nationality 
Act (the Act) section 203(b )(2), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b )(2). 
The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the petition, concluding the Petitioner had not 
established 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. 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 Christa'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, petitioners must demonstrate qualification for the 
underlying EB-2 visa classification, as either an advanced degree professional or as an individual of 
exceptional ability in the sciences, arts, or business. Section 203(b )(2)(B)(i) of the Act. In addition, 
petitioners must show the merit of a discretionary waiver of the job offer requirement "in the national 
interest." Section 203(b )(2)(B)(i) of the Act. Matter ofDhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. 884, 889 (AAO 2016) 
provides that U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) may, as matter of discretion 1, grant 
a national interest waiver if: 
• The proposed endeavor has both substantial merit and national importance; 
• The individual is well-positioned to advance their proposed endeavor; and 
• On balance, waiving the job offer requirement would benefit the United States. 
1 See also Poursina v. USCIS, 936 F.3d 868 (9th Cir. 2019) (finding USCIS' decision to grant or deny a national interest 
waiver to be discretionary in nature). 
II. ANALYSIS 
Regarding the national 
interest waiver, the first prong relates to substantial merit and national importance 
of the specific proposed endeavor. Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. The Petitioner's initial cover letter 
indicated: 
[The Petitioner], who has an incredible wealth of knowledge and decades of experience 
in both European and American electrical systems design, standards and technology, will 
provide highly specialized consulting services to U.S. electrical companies utilizing 
European technology as well as German, Austrian and Swiss electrical companies 
operating in the U.S. Specifically, [the Petitioner], will engage in activities such as, but 
not limited to, construction, project management, management, maintenance management 
and sales management consulting within the electrical industry, servicing the 
aforementioned companies. 
In addition, the Petitioner provided a business plan for H-C-T- reflecting the company's mission 
"[t]o share [the Petitioner's] global knowledge and experience from more than 40 years of 
construction and management in the field of electrical engineering in the most varied industrial 
branches international and national companies." 
In response to the Director's request for evidence (RFE), the Petitioner submitted a "Proposed Endeavor 
Statement" indicating: 
My proposed endeavor is to build on my extensive experience and knowledge in the fields 
of European Electrical Engineering, and more than 30 years of professional experience in 
the fields of - development, design, planning, software, commissioning of PLC in 
automation, project and product management, quality management, installation 
mechanical and electrical, to improve the field and contribute to the furtherance of the 
nation by and through my related projects, such as construction, project management, 
maintenance management and sales management consulting, providing highly specialized 
consulting services to US electrical companies using European technology, as well as 
German, Austrian and Swiss electrical companies operating in the United States, in order­
to pass on the knowledge and experience I have to the employees of the company I work 
for and, or course, to Improve the quality of the installation service to be provided .... 
The Petitioner also offered an "Updated Personal Statement" reflecting: 
. . . I have extensive experience in both European and U.S. electrical system design, 
standards and technology, and plan to provide highly specialized consulting services to 
U.S. electrical companies using European technology, as well as German, Austrian and 
Swiss electrical companies operating in the United States. 
My endeavor is to perform activities such as, but not limited to, construction, project 
management, maintenance management and sales management consulting within the 
electrical industry, serving the aforementioned companies. 
2 
This will be possible through the creation of the consulting company [H-C-T-], in 
furtherance of my proposed endeavor to implement my developments and protocols train 
in the USA the European standard at USA companies tohere [sic] the employees, in the 
areas ofmechanics and electrical installations in the industries, documentation, guidelines, 
protocols, among others. 
Regarding substantial merit, the endeavor's merits may be demonstrated in a range of areas such as 
business, entrepreneurialism, science, technology, culture, health, or education. Dhanasar, 26 I&N 
Dec. at 889. The Petitioner provided documentation on a wide range of topics, such as electrical 
standards, foreign direct investment, trade investment, job creation from German investment, the 
importance of apprenticeship, and skill shortages. Here, the Petitioner has shown the substantial merit 
of his proposed endeavor. 
In determining national importance, the relevant question is not the importance of the industry or 
profession in which the individual will work; instead, we focus on "the specific endeavor that the 
foreign national proposes to undertake." See Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. Although the Petitioner 
argues the national importance of the wide range of topics indicated above, the Petitioner must 
demonstrate the national importance of his specific, proposed endeavor of his particular electrical 
engineering consulting services through his business rather than the importance of electrical standards, 
investments, apprenticeships, or the industry or field. In Dhanasar, we noted that "we look for broader 
implications" of the proposed endeavor and that "[a]n undertaking may have national importance for 
example, because it has national or even global implications within a particular field." Id. We also 
stated that "[ a ]n endeavor that has significant potential to employ U.S. workers or has other substantial 
positive economic effects, particularly in an economically depressed area, for instance, may well be 
understood to have national importance." Id. at 890. 
The Petitioner also contends that his "endeavor in the instant case holds greater national importance 
since [it] will directly tackle the STEM [science, technology, engineering, or mathematics] shortage, 
especially electrical engineers, and the shortage of skilled labor in the electrical industry." However, 
the alleged shortage of occupations or occupational skills does not render his proposed endeavor 
nationally important under the Dhanasar framework. In fact, such shortages of qualified workers are 
directly addressed by the U.S. Department of Labor through the labor certification process. 
Furthermore, with respect to the first prong, as in all cases, the evidence must demonstrate that a STEM 
endeavor has both substantial merit and national importance. 2 Many proposed endeavors that aim to 
advance STEM technologies and research, whether in academic or industry settings, not only have 
substantial merit in relation to U.S. science and technology interests, but also have sufficiently broad 
potential implications to demonstrate national importance. 3 On the other hand, while proposed 
classroom teaching activities in STEM, for example, may have substantial merit in relation to U.S. 
educational interests, such activities, by themselves, generally are not indicative of an impact in the 
field of STEM education more broadly, and therefore generally would not establish their national 
importance. 4 
2 See generally 5 USCIS Policy Manual D.2, https://www.uscis.gov/policymanual. 
3 Id. 
4 Id. 
3 
To evaluate whether the Petitioner's proposed endeavor satisfies the national importance requirement, 
we look to evidence documenting the "potential prospective impact" of his work. The Petitioner did 
not offer specific information and evidence to corroborate his assertions that the prospective impact 
of working as an electrical engineering consultant rises to the level of national importance. In 
Dhanasar, we determined the petitioner's teaching activities did not rise to the level of having national 
importance because they would not impact his field more broadly. Id. at 893. Here, the record does 
not show through supporting documentation how his specific consulting services stand to sufficiently 
extend beyond his prospective clients, to impact the industry or the U.S. economy more broadly at a 
level commensurate with national importance. 
In addition, the Petitioner repeatedly emphasized his experience, skills, and knowledge. The 
Petitioner's experience and abilities in his field relate to the second prong of the Dhanasar framework, 
which "shifts the focus from the proposed endeavor to the foreign national." Id. at 890. The issue 
here is whether the specific endeavor he proposes to undertake has national importance under 
Dhanasar's first prong. 
Finally, although the Petitioner provided a business plan, the Petitioner did not demonstrate how his 
business' claimed revenue and employment projections, even if credible or plausible, have significant 
potential to employ U.S. workers or otherwise offers substantial positive economic effects for our 
nation. While the revenue forecasts $37K in year 1 to $126K in year 3, the business plan does not 
establish the benefits to the regional or national economy would reach the level of "substantial positive 
economic effects" contemplated by Dhanasar. Id. at 890. Similarly, although the plan claims the 
business would create only one position (for the Petitioner) and possibly two more positions at a later 
date, the Petitioner did not show that such future staffing levels would provide substantial economic 
benefits to Florida or the region or U.S. economy more broadly at a level commensurate with national 
importance. The Petitioner, for instance, did not demonstrate that such employment figures would 
utilize a significant population of workers in the area or would substantially impact job creation and 
economic growth, either regionally or nationally. For all these reasons, the record does not establish 
that, beyond the limited benefits provided to its prospective clients, the Petitioner's proposed endeavor 
has broader implications rising to the level of having national importance or that it would offer 
substantial positive economic effects. 
Because the documentation in the record does not establish the national importance of his proposed 
endeavor as required by the first prong of the Dhanasar precedent decision, the Petitioner has not 
demonstrated eligibility for a national interest waiver. Further analysis of his eligibility under the second 
and third prongs outlined in Dhanasar, therefore, would serve no meaningful purpose. 5 
III. CONCLUSION 
As the Petitioner has not met the 
requisite first prong ofthe Dhanasar analytical framework, we conclude 
he has not demonstrated eligibility for or otherwise merits a national interest waiver as a matter of 
5 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 l&N Dec. 516,526 n.7 (BIA 2015) 
( declining to reach alternate issues on appeal where applicants do not otherwise meet their burden of proof). 
4 
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. 
5