dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Entrepreneurship

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: OCT. 04, 2023 In Re: 28433369 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, an entrepreneur, seeks employment-based second preference (EB-2) immigrant 
classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree and an individual of 
exceptional ability , 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, concluding the record did not establish: 
(1) the Petitioner qualified for the EB-2 classification; (2) the national importance of the proposed 
endeavor; or (3) that it would be in the United States' interest to waive the requirement of a labor 
certification. 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 of Chawathe, 25 l&N Dec. 369, 375-76 (AAO 2010). We review the questions in this matter 
de nova. Matter a/Christa's, Inc., 26 l&N Dec. 537,537 n.2 (AAO 2015). Upon de nova review, 
we will dismiss the appeal. 
I. LEGAL FRAMEWORK 
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, arts, or business. Section 203(b)(2)(B)(i) of the Act. 
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 ofprogressive experience in the specialty is the equivalent of a master's 
degree. 
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 
that satisfies at least three of six categories of evidence. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(ii)(A)-(F). 1 Meeting 
at least three criteria, however, does not, in and of itself, establish eligibility for this classification. 2 
We will then conduct a final merits determination to decide whether the evidence in its totality shows 
that they are recognized as having a degree of expertise significantly above that ordinarily encountered 
in the field. 
Once a petitioner demonstrates eligibility as either a member of the professions holding an advanced 
degree or an individual of exceptional ability, 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 l&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 discretion3, 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. 
11. ANALYSIS 
After the initial filing of the petition, the Director issued a request for evidence (RFE) to the Petitioner. 
In the RFE, the Director explained that the evidence did not establish that the Petitioner qualified for 
the underlying classification either as an advanced degree professional or as an individual of 
exceptional ability. Regarding eligibility as an advanced degree professional, the Director stated: 
[T]he petitioner provided insufficient evidence to establish that he is a member of the 
professions holding an advanced degree. In this case, the [academic credential] 
evaluator assessed that the petitioner obtained a Bachelor's in Business Administration 
based on the "3-for-1 Rule" which combines 15 years of the petitioner's claimed work 
experience and his high school diploma to equate to a bachelor's degree. A United 
States baccalaureate degree is generally found to require four years of education. 
Three-year degrees, even in conjunction with one year of experience, do not equal a 
U.S. bachelor's degree except under exceptional circumstances. Matter of Shah, 17 
l&N Dec. 244 (Reg. Comm. 1977). 
Although the Petitioner responded to the RFE, the Director denied the petition, concluding the record 
did not establish the Petitioner's eligibility for the underlying EB-2 classification and two of the three 
Dhanasar prongs. Regarding the Petitioner's eligibility as an individual of exceptional ability, the 
1 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). 
2 USCIS has previously confirmed the applicability of this two-part adjudicative approach in the context of individuals of 
exceptional ability. See generally 6 USCIS Policy Manual F.5(B)(2), https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual/volume-6-
part-f-chapter-5. 
3 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). 
2 
Director concluded the Petitioner had not met at least three of the six criteria at 8 C.F.R. 
§ 204.5(k)(3)(ii). 
On appeal, the Petitioner provides no evidence or arguments addressing the concerns of the Director 
regarding his eligibility for the underlying classification.4 Therefore, we consider this issue 
abandoned. See Matter of R-A-M-. 25 l&N Dec. 657. 658 n.2 (BIA 2012) (stating that when a filing 
party fails to appeal an issue addressed in an adverse decision, that issue is waived). See also Sepulveda 
v. US. Att'v Gen., 401 F.3d 1226. 1228 n. 2 (11th Cir. 2005). citing United States v. Cunningham, 161 
F.3d 1343, 1344 (11th Cir. 1998); Hristov v. Roark, No. 09-CV-27312011, 2011 WL 4711885 at *1, 
*9 (E.D.N.Y. Sept. 30, 2011) (plaintiff's claims were abandoned as he failed to raise them on appeal 
to the AAO). 
As explained above, 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. Because the Petitioner abandoned a threshold 
issue, the remainder of the Petitioner's arguments need not be addressed. It is unnecessary to analyze 
any remaining independent grounds when another is dispositive of the appeal. Therefore, we decline 
to reach but hereby reserve arguments concerning eligibility under the Dhanasar prongs. See INS v. 
Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. 24, 25 (1976) (finding it unnecessary to analyze additional grounds when 
another independent issue is dispositive of the appeal); see also Matter of L-A-C-, 26 l&N Dec. 516, 
526 n.7 (BIA 2015) (declining to reach alternative issues on appeal where an applicant is otherwise 
ineligible). 
111. CONCLUSION 
As the Petitioner has not established that he qualifies for the underlying EB-2 classification, he has 
not established that he is eligible for or otherwise merits a national interest waiver. The appeal will 
be dismissed for the above stated reason. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
4 On appeal, the Petitioner reasserts his eligibility under each prong of the Dhanasar framework but does not specifically 
identify any erroneous conclusion of law or statement of fact in the Director's decision, as required under 8 C.F.R. § 
103.3(a)(l)(v). As such, the appeal may be summarily dismissed on this issue alone. 
3