dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Entrepreneurship

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: DEC. 03, 2024 In Re: 35465872 
Motion on Administrative Appeals Office 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, 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 Petitioner's Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for 
Alien Workers, concluding that the record did not establish that the Petitioner was eligible for and 
merited a national interest waiver as a matter of discretion. We summarily dismissed an appeal after 
concluding the Petitioner did not identify any erroneous conclusion of law or statement of fact in the 
Director's decision. 1 We also dismissed a subsequent motion to reconsider. The matter is now before 
us on a second motion to reconsider. 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). 
Upon review, we will dismiss the motion. 
A motion to reconsider must establish that our prior decision was based on an incorrect application of 
law or policy and that the decision was incorrect based on the evidence in the record of proceedings 
at the time of the decision. 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(3). Our review on motion is limited to reviewing our 
latest decision. 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(l)(ii) . We may grant motions that satisfy these requirements and 
demonstrate eligibility for the requested benefit. 
In his second motion to reconsider, the Petitioner submits, in essence, the same brief and evidence that 
he provided with his first motion, which only raises issues related to the Director's decision. He does 
not, however, contest the correctness of our decision to dismiss his first motion to reconsider, which 
is the latest decision in these proceedings. As the Petitioner does not assert that our decision to dismiss 
his motion was based on an incorrect application of law or policy, or that the decision was incorrect 
based on the evidence in the record of proceedings at the time of the decision, we will dismiss the 
motion. 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(4). 
1 The Petitioner submitted an appeal in May 2023 (first appeal) that we summarily dismissed . We note that the Petitioner 
filed a separate appeal (second appeal) approximately one week after filing the first appeal for which we issued a separate 
decision on the merits. On his first motion to reconsider , the Petitioner identified the receipt number for the first appeal as 
the basis for his motion, and we therefore addressed only that decision. 
ORDER: The motion to reconsider is dismissed. 
2