dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Engineering

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
MATTER OF M-Z-H-
APPEAL OF TEXAS SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: JAN. 3, 2019 
PETITION: · FORM 1-140, IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER 
The Petitioner, an engineering consultant, 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 offer requirement attached to this EB-2 classification. See Immigration and Nationality Act (the 
Ac~) section 203(b)(2), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(2). After a petitioner has established eligibility for EB-2 
classification, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) may, as matter·of discretion, 
grant a national interest waiver if the petitioner demonstrates: (I) 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. Matier <~f' 
Dhanasar, 26 l&N Dec. 884 (AAO 2016). 
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. 
On appeal, the Petitioner submits additional evidence and contends that he is eligible for a national 
interest waiver under the Dhanasar framework. 
Upon de novo review, we will dismiss the appeal. 
I. LAW 
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, ?rts, 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 ofter requirement is in the national interest. · 
Section 203(b) of the Act sets out this sequential framework: 
Matter<?[ M-Z-1-1-
(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) 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 sciences, arts, 
profession~, or business be sought by an employer in the United States. 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2) contains the following relevant definition: 
Advanced degree means any United States aca9emic or professional degree or a 
foreign equivalent degree above that of baccalaureate. A United States baccalaureate 
degree or a foreign equivalent degree followed by at least five years of progressive 
experience in the specialty shall be considered the equivalent of a master's degree. If 
a doctoral degree is customarily required by the specialty, the alien must have a 
United States doctorate or a foreign equivalent degree. 
Furthermore, while 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 Maller of Dhanasar, 26 l&N Dec. 884. 1 Dhanasar states that after EB-2 
eligibility has been established, USCIS may, as a matter of discretion, grant a national interest l 
waiver when the below prongs are ll)el. 
The first prong, substantial merit and national importance, focuses on the specific endeavor that the 
foreign national 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 
d_etermining whether. the proposed endeavor has national importance, we consider its potential 
prospective impact. 
1 In announcing this new framework, we vacated our prior precedent decision, Matier of New York State Department (!l 
Transportation, 22 l&N Dec. 215 (Act. Assoc. Comm'r 1998) (N>'SD01). 
2 
.
Mauer of M-Z-H-
The second prong shifts the focus from the proposed endeavor to the foreign national. To determine 
whether he or she 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; any progress towards achieving the 
proposed endeavor; and the interest of potential customers, users, investors , or other relevant entities 
or individuals. 
The third prong requires the petitioner to demonstrate 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 . In 
performing this analysis, USC IS may evaluate factors such as: whether , in light of the nature of the 
foreign national's ·qualifications or the proposed endeavor, it would be impractical either for the 
foreign national to secure a job offer or for the petitioner to obtain a labor certification ; whether, 
even assuming that other qualified U.S . workers are available, the United States wou _ld still benefit 
from the foreign national's contributions; and whether the national interest in the foreign national's 
contributions is sufficiently urgent to warrant forgoing the labor certification process . In each case, 
the factor(s) 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.2 
IL ANALYSIS 
A. Member of the Professions Holding an Advanced Degree 
The Petitioner presented his "Bachelor of Science in Civil Engineering" (1984) and "Master of Science 
in Civil Engineering" (1997) degrees from of Engineering- and Technology, 
Dhaka . The record, however, does not contain an academic credentials evaluation to establish his 
foreign degrees ' equivalency to a United States degree .3 See 8 C.F.R . § 204 .5(k)(2) and 8 C.F.R. 
§ 204.5(k)(3)(i)(A)-(B). Accordingly , the Petitoner has adequately documented that he qualifies for 
cl_assitication as a member of the professions holding an advance _d degree . 
B. National Interest Waiver 
The remaining issue is whether the Petitioner has established that a waiver of the requirement of a job 
offer, and thus a labor certification, is in the national interest. With regard to his proposed endeavor. the 
Petitioner asserts that he intends to work "as a self-employed consulting engineer/entrepreneur." He 
describes his future plans as follows: 
On one side, I will be providing consulting engineering services to the various 
consulting companies as needed and requested. · I will also extend engmeermg 
2 See Dhanasar , 26 l&N Dec. at 888-91, for elaboration on these three prongs. 
3 While the Petitioner submitted an "Informal Assessment of Qualifications for Engineers" form and an assessment 
results letter from the , this documentation does not discuss his foreign 
degrees' equivalency to a United States degree. 
3 
.
Malter of M-Z-H-
services for independent projects . . . . I will further extend my services in oftering 
technical classes/instructions , on building codes and engineering software and 
engineering draning /design as needed /demanded. 
On the other side , I will engage myself towards renewable power energy sector - for 
example , solar power energy . I am capable of planning, designing and constructing, 
such projects . 
' The Petitioner further explains that his proposed ;;consulting engineering service" will provide "a 
wide range of structural analysis and designs of various types of structures , including various types 
of buildings/tall buildings/non-buildings and related structures like retaining walls , underground and 
overhead water tanks, various types of foundations, industrial structures etc., by applying various 
structur _al engineering software . ... " In addition, he asserts that his company will ofter _ "all 
structural engineering services from the beginning to the end of the project. " Furthermore , the 
Petitioner states that his company 's services will include project consulting , forensic investigations , 
project management, dispute resolution, restoration engineering , renewable energy engineering 
support , manufacturing sector stress analyses, structural engineering course instruction , and software 
development. We find that the Petitioner 's proposed endeavor to provide engineering consulting 
services to company owners , architects , and developers has substantial merit. 
With respect to the national importance of the proposed endeavor , the Petitioner claims that his 
undertaking "will create jobs " and "will have a substantial impact on the economy of the country ." 
He presents a business plan that lists "Start-up Funding" requirements of $25,000. Regarding future 
staffing , the Petitioner asserts that in the first year he will hire ;'at least one designer /draftsman " to 
support company projects. · He further anticipates that "by the end of 3rd year , the number of staff 
including me will grow to 4." In addition , his plan includes sales projections of $200,000 in year 
one, $250 ,000 in year two, and $300 ,000 in year three. 
The record includes articles describing the economic impact of home building and school construction . 
·For example, the Petitioner offers a report from the National A~sociation of Home Builders discussing 
income, jobs , and taxes generated from single-family, multi-family , and residential. remodeling home 
building projects in a typical local area. In addition , he submits a 2011 article about construction of a 
. hydrogen chloride (HCl) processing and packaging facility in Texas and its potential benefit to 
domestic customers in the HCI market. The Director determined that these articles and the infom1ation 
th~ Petitioner provided about his proposed endeavor were not sufficient . to demonstrate its national 
importance. Specifically , the Director found that the Petitioner had not shown that his proposed 
endeavor as an engineering consultant has implications beyond his projects and clients at a level 
sufficie('!t to demonstrate its national importance . · 
On appeal,_ the Petitioner maintains that his company "will create jobs and will have a substantial 
positive impact on the economy. " He contends that his ''proposed endeavor will start locally and 
gradually it will spread nationwide and globally. " In addition, the Petitioner asserts that his company 
4 
.
Maller of M-Z-H-
"will participate in local, national and global tenders for consultancy engineering service[s] from its 
office located in Texas - and gradually it will spread its office presence nationally and globally." 
The Petitioner's appellate submission includes information relating to past projects in which he claims 
to have participated such as the project (Canada), ==------=== (Canada), 
· (Indonesia), and _ _ 
(Texas). He argues that "evidence of the economic impact of some projects performed by me in the 
past" helps predict the impact likely to emerge from future projects relating to his proposed endeavor. 
· The record, however, does not identify any future U.S. projects that he proposes to undertake that are 
similar in economic scale to the aforementioned projects. In addition, the Petitioner submits 
infonnation from Wikipedia regarding public works programs, reports discussing the impact of 
construction activity and housing development, and articles about employment trends in the oil and gas 
industry. While this documentation helps show the merit of the Petitioner's proposed work, the 
evidence is not sufficient to demonstrate the national importance of any particular engineering 
consulting work proposed by the Petitioner_ 
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 "the specific endeavor that the 
foreign national proposes to undertake." See Dhanasar, 26 l&N Dec. at 889. In Dhanasar, we 
further 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 economi~ effects, particulady in 
an economically depressed area, for instance, may well be understood to have national importance_" 
Id. at 890. 
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. 
Although the Petitioner's statements reflect his intention to provide valuable engineering services to 
his company's prospective clients, he has not offered sufficient information and evidence to 
· demonstrate that the prospective impact of his proposed endeavor rises to the level of national 
importance_ In the same way that Dlwnosar finds that a classroom teacher's proposed endeavor is 
not nationally important because it will not impact the field more hroadll, we find that the 
Petitioner has not shown his proposed endeavor in this case stands to sul'licicntly extend beyond his 
company and its clients to impact the industry tn<;> re broadly than his specific engineering consulting 
projects. Nor has he shown that his particular work \Vould have broader implications for the tield of 
structural engineering. · · 
Furthermore, the Petitioner has not demonstrated that the specific endeavor he proposes to undertake 
has significant potential to .employ U.S. workers or otherwise offers substantial positive economic 
effects for our nation.. While the appeal brief mentions past projects in which he participated and 
4 See Id. at 893. 
5 
Mauer of M-Z-H-
potential job creation resulting from staffing his company, the record does not include sufficient 
information or evidence regarding any projected U.S. economic impact or job creation attributable to 
his future engineering consulting work. The record does not show that benefits to the regional or 
. national economy resulting from the Petitioner's projects would reach the level of "substantial positive 
economic effects" contemplated by Dhanasar. Id. at 890. Accordingly, the Petitioner's proposed 
work does not meet the first prong of the Dhanasar li·aincwork. 
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 
secon~ and third prongs outlined in Dhqnasar, therefore, would serve no meaningful purpose. 
III. CONCLUSION 
As the Petitioner has not met the requisite first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework, we find 
that he has not established he is eligible for or otherwise merits a national interest waiver as a m~tter 
of discretion. · 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
-Cite as Maller <4° M-Z-H-, ID# 1850803 (AAO Jan. 3, 2019) 
6