dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Environmental Education

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: JAN. 29, 2025 In Re: 36401930 
Appeal of Nebraska Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, an environmental educator, 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. § l 153(b )(2). 
The Director of the Nebraska Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the Petitioner did not 
establish eligibility for a national interest waiver of the job offer requirement; as relevant to this appeal, 
the Director determined that the national importance of the proposed endeavor had not been 
established. 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 Christa's, Inc., 26 I&N Dec. 537,537 n.2 (AAO 2015). Upon de novo review, 
we will dismiss the appeal. 
On appeal, the Petitioner presents additional evidence and asserts that the national importance of the 
endeavor has been established, because the proposed environmental awareness education program 
aligns with Environmental Protection Agency initiatives. In addition, the Petitioner argues that the 
program has been implemented across multiple schools and organizations. To show adoption in 
churches, schools, and other organizations, the Petitioner includes letters from agencies in Zimbabwe, 
local churches in Tennessee, and other community organizations such as retirement centers. The 
Petitioner stresses that the program will equip individuals in various sectors of society to care for the 
environment, and that he will continue to extend this impact by holding environmental awareness 
program workshops . The Petitioner includes letters of support from professors and former colleagues 
highlighting his critical thinking, teaching ability, commitment to sustainability, and background in 
environmental issues. Finally, the Petitioner contends that his endeavor has advanced because he has 
accepted a position with the Office of Sustainability Initiatives at I I 
We adopt and affirm the Director's decision. See Matter of Burbano, 20 I&N Dec. 872, 874 
(BIA 1994); see also Giday v. INS, 113 F.3d 230, 234 (D.C. Cir. 1997) (noting that the practice of 
adopting and affirming the decision below "is not only common practice, but universally accepted"). 
While the Petitioner has provided evidence showing that his work on sustainability initiatives 
continues, and that he has provided lectures and presentations to churches and other community 
organizations, this evidence does not address the Director's determination that the Petitioner's 
teaching activities are insufficient to show national importance. 
The Director fully credited the Petitioner's abilities in the arena of environmental education and 
discussed his qualifications. However, as noted in the Director's decision, an endeavor must show 
broader implications including impacting a particular field or broadly enhancing societal welfare. 
Here, the Petitioner has demonstrated that additional workshops have been held and other workshops 
are planned. We do not doubt that the participants in the Petitioner's program may receive valuable 
insights. However, the Petitioner has not shown that he will have an impact beyond his students or 
community participants; he has not shown, for instance, that he employs a particular methodology that 
will impact the environmental education field, that the endeavor offers significant employment 
potential for U.S. workers, or that the proposed endeavor otherwise meets the national importance 
criterion as outlined in our precedent decision in Matter ofDhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. 884 (AAO 2016). 
The remaining evidence submitted on appeal, such as the Petitioner's work with 
has not been explained in detail, nor has it been adequately related to the proposed endeavor; a general 
nexus to the field of environmental education or to sustainability initiatives is insufficient to 
demonstrate the national importance of the Petitioner's proposed endeavor. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
2