dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Entrepreneurship

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: AUG. 13, 2024 In Re: 31678662 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, an entrepreneur in the wall paper industry, seeks second preference immigrant 
classification 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. § 1 l 53(b )(2). 
The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the petition, concluding that although the Petitioner 
qualified as an advanced degree professional, he did not establish that a waiver of the required job 
offer, and thus of the labor certification, would be in the national interest. 1 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 ofChawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369, 375-76 (AAO 2010). We review the questions in this matter 
de novo. Matter of Christo 's, Inc., 26 l&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. 
An advanced degree is any U.S. academic or professional degree or a foreign equivalent degree above 
that of a bachelor's degree. A U.S. bachelor's degree or foreign equivalent degree followed by five 
years of progressive experience in the specialty is the equivalent of a master's degree. 
8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2). 
Exceptional ability means a degree of expertise significantly above that ordinarily encountered in the 
sciences, arts, or business. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2). A petitioner must initially submit documentation 
1 An advanced degree is any United States academic or professional degree or a foreign equivalent degree above that of a 
bachelor's degree. A United States bachelor's degree or foreign equivalent degree followed by five years of progressive 
experience in the specialty is the equivalent of a master's degree. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2). 
that satisfies at least three of six categories of evidence. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(ii)(A)-(F). 2 Meeting 
at least three criteria, however, does not, in and of itself, establish eligibility for this classification. 3 If 
a petitioner does so, we will then conduct a final merits determination to decide whether the evidence 
in its totality shows that they are recognized as having the requisite degree of expertise and will 
substantially benefit the national economy, cultural or educational interests, or welfare of the United 
States. Section 203(b )(2)(A) of the Act. 
If a petitioner demonstrates eligibility for the underlying EB-2 classification, they must then establish 
that they merit a discretionary waiver of the job offer requirement "in the national interest." 
Section 203(b )(2)(B)(i) of the Act. While neither the statute nor the pertinent regulations define the 
term "national interest," Matter of Dhanasar, 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, 4 grant a national interest waiver if 
the petitioner demonstrates that: 
• 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. 
Id. 
II. ANALYSIS 
A. EB-2 Visa Classification 
As indicated above, the 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. Section 203(b)(2)(B)(i) of the Act. The Director determined that the 
Petitioner is a member of the professions holding an advanced degree. However, upon de novo review, 
we disagree. 
The Petitioner provided a copy of his diploma for the Titulo de Tecn6logo in management of small 
and medium sized entreprises and transcripts from indicating that he began his 
studies in 2003 and completed them in 2006, a period of three years. According to the American 
Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers (AACRAO) Electronic Database for 
Global Education (EDGE) entry for the Titulo de Tecn6logo, it is awarded following two to three years 
of undergraduate study. 5 However, a bachelor's degree is generally found to require four years of 
2 If these types of evidence do not readily apply to the individual's occupation, a petitioner may submit comparable 
evidence to establish their eligibility. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(iii). 
3 USCTS has previously confirmed the applicability of this two-part adjudicative approach in the context of individuals of 
exceptional ability. 6 USCIS Policy Manual F.5(B)(2), https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual/volume-6-part-f-chapter-5. 
4 See also Flores v. Garland. 72 F.4th 85, 88 (5th Cir. 2023) (joining the Ninth, Eleventh, and D.C. Circuit Courts (and 
Third in an unpublished decision) in concluding that USCIS' decision to grant or deny a national interest waiver to be 
discretionary in nature). 
5 We consider EDGE to be a reliable source ofinfonnation about foreign credential equivalencies. See Confluence Intern., 
2 
education. Matter ofShah, 17 I&N Dec. 244 (Comm'r 1977). There is no provision in the statute or 
the regulations that would allow a petitioner to qualify under section 203(b )(2) of the Act as a member 
of the professions holding an advanced degree with anything less than a full baccalaureate degree (plus 
five years of progressive experience in the specialty). 
While we acknowledge the submission of a credential evaluation, the evaluation is based on the 
Petitioner's three-year coursework at ______ and his over 28 years of experience. Thus, 
this evaluation is not in accord with the relevant regulation. The regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2) 
refers to "degree" in the singular, indicating that an advanced degree equivalency requires a degree 
that is either a single U.S. bachelor's degree or a single foreign equivalent of a U.S. bachelor's degree, 
without combining educational credentials or combining education with experience. As the plain 
language of the regulation demonstrates that an advanced degree equivalency requires a single degree, 
rather than a combination of experiences or lesser education credentials, we will not grant any 
evidentiary weight to the evaluation presented on record. Matter of Caron Int 'l, Inc., 19 I&N Dec. 
791, 795 (stating that we may give less weight to or decline to accept an expert opinion that is not in 
accord with other information or is in any way questionable). As such, the Petitioner has not 
established by a preponderance of the evidence that he is a member of the professions holding an 
advanced degree and we withdraw the Director's determination on this issue. 
In addition, while the Petitioner initially claimed he qualifies for EB-2 classification as an individual 
of exceptional ability, the Director did not address this issue. Since the evidence in the record does 
not establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the Petitioner is eligible for, or otherwise merits, 
a national interest waiver as a matter of discretion, we will reserve the issue of whether he qualifies 
for EB-2 classification as an individual of exceptional ability for future consideration should the need 
arise. 6 
B. National Interest Waiver 
A petitioner must identify the specific endeavor they propose to undertake. Dhanasar at 889. On Part 
6 of the petition, the Petitioner indicated that his proposed employment is chief executive/ entrepreneur 
and his support letter stated that his "proposed endeavor is to advance U.S. business, technology, and 
entrepreneurialism through his wallpaper company." However, later in the same letter, the Petitioner 
stated that his "proposed endeavor to work as a CEO / Entrepreneur has substantial merit, because it 
will advance U.S. business, technology, and entrepreneurialism through his transportation company." 
(Emphasis added). The Petitioner also submitted a business plan for a wallpaper company as well as 
a Professional Plan and Statement (PPS), but the PPS stated: "Please accept this enclosed statement 
and professional plan as part of my petition as a Treasurer and Controller." In addition, the Petitioner 
declared that he intends "to continue using [his] expertise and knowledge in the field of finance by 
working as a Treasurer and Controller, where [he] can provide [his] expert treasury and business 
Inc. v. Holder, Civil No. 08-2665 (DSD-JJG), 2009 WL 825793 (D. Minn. Mar. 27, 2009); Tisco Group, Inc. v. Napolitano, 
No. 09-cv-l 0072. 2010 WL 3464314 (E.D. Mich. Aug. 30, 2010); Sunshine Rehab Services, Inc. No. 09-13605. 2010 WL 
3325442 (E.D. Mich. Aug.20.2010). See also Viraj, LLC v. Holder, No. 2:12-CV-00127-RWS, 2013 WL 1943431 (N.D. 
Ga. May 18, 2013). For more information. visit https://www.aacrao.org/edge. 
6 See INS v. Bagamasbad. 429 U.S. 24. 25 (1976) ("courts and agencies are not required to make findings on issues the 
decision of which is unnecessary to the results they reach"); see also Matter of L-A-C-, 26 l&N Dec. 516. 526 n.7 (BIA 
2015) ( declining to reach alternate issues on appeal where an applicant is otherwise ineligible). 
3 
controllership services to U.S. companies" and that his "career plan in the United States is to continue 
[his] career by working as a Treasurer and Controller." Then, in response to the Director's requests 
for evidence, the Petitioner again contended that his proposed endeavor is to be a chief 
executive/entrepreneur for a wallpaper business. 
On appeal, the Petitioner, without explanation, continues to address both endeavors. For instance, the 
Petitioner states, "[t]he benefit generated to the United States from the Appellant's prospective 
contributions to the financial industry in the United States will be concrete and substantial" and that 
his "proposed endeavor to offer his expertise as a Treasurer and Controller in the field of Finance 
does not adversely affect U.S. workers." But then, the Petitioner again discusses the business plan for 
his wallpaper company. The Petitioner must resolve these inconsistencies in the record with 
independent, objective evidence pointing to where the truth lies. Matter ofHo, 19 I&N Dec. 582, 591-
92 (BIA 1988). 
Because the Petitioner has not consistently described his proposed endeavor, we cannot conclude that 
he has sufficiently established its substantial merit and national importance. And because the 
Petitioner has not demonstrated that his proposed endeavor has substantial merit and national 
importance as required by the first Dhanasar prong, he is not eligible for a national interest waiver. 
Therefore, we reserve our opinion regarding the second and third Dhanasar prongs. See INS v. 
Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. at 25; see also Matter ofL-A-C-, 26 I&N Dec. at 526 n.7. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
4