dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Electrical Engineering

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: JAN. 8, 2025 In Re: 35751144 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, an electrical engineer, seeks employment-based second preference (EB-2) immigrant 
classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree, as well as a national interest 
waiver of the job offer requirement attached to this classification. See 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. The Director determined that the 
Petitioner qualifies as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree. However, the Director 
concluded that the record did not establish that a waiver of the job offer requirement, and thus of a 
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 of Chawathe, 25 l&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 qualify for the underlying EB-2 visa classification, a petitioner must establish they are an advanced 
degree professional or an individual of exceptional ability in the sciences, arts, or business. Section 
203(b )(2)(A) of the Act. 
If a petitioner establishes eligibility for the underlying EB-2 classification, they must then demonstrate 
that they merit 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 
the framework for adjudicating national interest waiver petitions. Dhanasar states that U.S. 
Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) may, as matter of discretion, 1 grant a national interest 
waiver if the petitioner demonstrates that: 
1 See Flores v. Garland, 72 F.4th 85, 88 (5th Cir. 2023) (joining the Third, Ninth, Eleventh, and D.C. Circuit Courts of 
Appeals in concluding that USCIS ' decision to grant or deny a national interest waiver is discretionary in nature). 
• The proposed endeavor has both substantial merit and national importance; 
• The individual is well-positioned to advance the proposed endeavor; and 
• On balance, waiving the job offer requirement would benefit the United States. 
Id. 
TI. ANALYSIS 
The Director found that the Petitioner qualifies as a member of the professions holding an advanced 
degree. However, for the reasons discussed below, the Petitioner has not established that the proposed 
endeavor has national importance, as required by the first Dhanasar prong. See id. 
The Petitioner described the endeavor as a plan "to continue his work maintaining state-of-the-art 
optical coordinate measurement machines for the U.S. auto industry to reduce carbon emissions and 
mitigate climate change." He asserted that he works as an independent contractor, providing "the 
exclusive source for maintenance of these machines for several corporations with substantial economic 
footprints in the United States, including The Petitioner also submitted letters 
of recommendation and publications that provide generalized information regarding fuel economy 
standards and public health. 
The Director determined that the proposed endeavor has substantial merit, as required in part by the 
first Dhanasar prong. See Matter of Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889-90. However, the Director 
observed that the record "does not convey an understanding of how [the Petitioner's] proposed 
employment activities stand to have a broader impact on the field, rising to the level of national 
importance," also required by the first Dhanasar prong. See id. The Director acknowledged that the 
record contains recommendation letters; however, the Director noted that neither the letters nor the 
remainder of the record "show how the [P]etitioner's proposed endeavor offers broad implications in 
the field that rise[] to the level of national importance." The Director acknowledged that the Petitioner 
submitted generalized information regarding fuel economy standards and public health. However, the 
Director noted that those publications do not mention the Petitioner or describe the specific endeavor 
he proposes to undertake, and they do not establish how the proposed endeavor may have national or 
even global implications within his field. See id. The Director further observed that the record does 
not "provide specific information on how [ the Petitioner] will create jobs and enhance societal welfare, 
rising to the level of national importance," or how the proposed endeavor may otherwise have 
substantial positive economic effects. See id. Based on those issues, the Director concluded the record 
does not establish the proposed endeavor has national importance, as required by the first Dhanasar 
prong. See id. The Director further concluded that the record does not satisfy the second and third 
Dhanasar prongs. See Matter ofDhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 888-91. 
On appeal, the Petitioner reasserts that generalized information in the record regarding fuel economy 
standards and public health establish that the proposed endeavor has national importance. More 
specifically, the Petitioner references "two publications from the Executive Office of the President of 
the United States, one from the White House, and one from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 
[(EPA)]," "a publication from the U.S. Department of Transportation and [two] Executive Order[s] 
issued by the White House." The Petitioner paraphrases the EPA publication as "stating that the 
transportation sector is 'the largest contributor of [greenhouse gas] emissions and EPA is addressing 
2 
climate change by taking ... actions to reduce [those] emissions."' In tum, the Petitioner quotes one 
of the Executive Orders as stating, "It is the policy of my Administration that climate considerations 
shall be an essential element of United States foreign policy and national security," and "[t]his Nation 
needs millions of construction, manufacturing, engineering, and skilled-trades workers to build a new 
American infrastructure and clean energy economy." The Petitioner reasserts on appeal that the 
referenced documents providing generalized information regarding fuel economy standards and public 
health establish that the proposed endeavor of working as an independent contractor "maintain[ing] 
machines used to manufacture fuel-efficient engines plainly 'impact[s] a matter' that the U.S. 
government has deemed of critical national importance," citing the USCIS Policy Manual. 
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 speci fie endeavor that the [ non citizen] proposes to undertake" and "we consider its potential 
prospective impact," looking for "broader implications." Matter ofDhanasar, 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." Matter ofDhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889-90. 
The record does not establish how the proposed endeavor may have national importance, as required 
by the first Dhanasar prong. See id. We first note that the generalized information in the record 
regarding fuel economy and public health, referenced by the Petitioner on appeal, does not address the 
Petitioner, the specific endeavor he proposes to undertake, and how its potential prospective impact 
may have the type of broader implications indicative of national importance, as contemplated by the 
first Dhanasar prong. See id. For example, the publications referenced by the Petitioner do not 
establish how his proposed endeavor of continuing to work as an independent contractor may have 
national or even global implications within the field of automotive manufacturing or any other 
particular field, such as those resulting from certain improved manufacturing processes or medical 
advances. See id. As another example, the publications do not establish how the Petitioner's proposal 
to work as an independent contractor may have significant potential to employ U.S. workers or other 
substantial positive economic effects, particularly in an economically depressed area. See id. Rather, 
the generalized information addresses the industry, field, or profession in which the Petitioner will 
work, including broad topics such as the transportation sector, greenhouse gas emissions, climate 
considerations, categories of workers. 
In tum, the record in general indicates that the proposed endeavor may benefit the Petitioner, as an 
independent contractor, and the particular corporations for which he proposes to continue providing 
his services. However, the record does not establish how the Petitioner's proposed endeavor to provide 
maintenance services for his client companies in the U.S. automotive industry may have national or 
even global implications beyond his clients, within the field of automotive manufacturing or any other 
particular field, such as those resulting from certain improved manufacturing processes or medical 
advances. See id. Although the Petitioner quotes an Executive Order that references a need for 
"millions of ... skilled-trades workers," the record does not establish how the Petitioner, as an 
independent contractor, demonstrates a significant potential to employ U.S. workers or other 
substantial positive economic effects, particularly in an economically depressed area, whether for his 
3 
own independent contracting business, his clients, or any other potential employer of U.S. workers. 
See id. 
In summation, the Petitioner has not established that the proposed endeavor has national importance, 
as required by the first Dhanasar prong; therefore, he 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). 
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. 
4