dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Exercise Physiology

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: DEC. 19, 2024 In Re: 34930355 
Appeal of Nebraska Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, an exercise physiologist and 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. § l 153(b)(2). 
The Director of the Nebraska Service Center denied the Petitioner's Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition 
for Alien Workers, concluding that the Petitioner established his underlying eligibility for EB-2 
classification as an advanced degree professional, but that he did not establish he merited a national 
interest waiver. 
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 of Chawathe, 25 I&N 
Dec. 369, 375-76 (AAO 2010). We review the questions in this matter de novo. Matter ofChristo 's, 
Inc., 26 I&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. 
If a petitioner establishes eligibility for the underlying EB-2 classification, they must then demonstrate 
that they merit a discretionary waiver of the job offer requirement "in the national interest." 
Section 203(b )(2)(B)(i) of the Act. Matter ofDhanasar, 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, 1 grant a national interest 
waiver if the petitioner demonstrates that: 
• The proposed endeavor has both substantial merit and national importance; 
1 See Brasil v. Sec'y ofDHS, 28 F.4th 1189, 1194 (11th Cir. 2022) (concluding that USCIS ' decision to grant or deny a 
national interest waiver is discretionary in nature). 
• 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 
The Director determined that the Petitioner is an advanced degree professional and therefore qualifies 
for the underlying EB-2 visa classification. Thus, the remaining issue 
to be determined is whether the 
Petitioner qualifies for a national interest waiver. 
The Petitioner's proposed endeavor is to work as an exercise physiologist and establish related 
businesses in the United States. The Director concluded that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor had 
substantial merit. We agree. However, the Director denied the national interest waiver, concluding 
that the Petitioner had not established any of the prongs under the Dhanasar analytical framework as 
required for the waiver, namely that his proposed endeavor was nationally important, that he was well 
positioned to advance the proposed endeavor, and that on balance, waiving the job offer requirement 
would benefit the United States. Id. On appeal, the Petitioner claims the Director erred in its 
conclusion, and that he meets all three prongs under the Dhanasar analytical framework and merits a 
national interest waiver. For the reasons discussed below, we find that the Petitioner has not 
established eligibility for a national interest waiver under the Dhanasar analytical framework, as he 
has not established the national importance of his proposed endeavor. 
A. Substantial Merit and National Importance 
The first prong of the Dhanasar framework, relating to substantial merit and national importance, 
focuses on the specific endeavor that the individual proposes to undertake. Id. The endeavor's merit 
may be demonstrated in areas such as business, entrepreneurialism, science, technology, culture, 
health, or education. Id. at 889. In determining whether the proposed endeavor has national 
importance, we consider its potential prospective impact, and "look for broader implications." For 
instance, we noted in Dhanasar that "[a]n undertaking may have national importance for example, 
because it has national or even global implications within a particular field." Id. Further, "[a]n 
endeavor that has significant potential to employ U.S. workers or has other substantial positive 
economic effects, particularly in an economically depressed area, for instance, may well be understood 
to have national importance." Id. at 890. 
The Petitioner provided, in part, professional plans wherein he stated that his proposed endeavor was 
to work as an exercise physiologist and entrepreneur. He explained that in this position he would 
provide services such as personal training, bodybuilding training, sports exercise psychology, and 
clinical exercise psychology, and that he seeks to empower individuals in their weight loss journeys 
and inspire a broader movement towards various sports activities. He stated that he would build his 
network and travel throughout the United States, including in economically distressed areas, and will 
establish fitness centers, wellness clinics, and related businesses. He claimed his proposed endeavor 
is nationally important because promoting health and well-being contributes to a healthier population 
which, in turn, leads to cost savings and improved overall public health which aligns with national and 
global efforts to promote healthier lifestyles, reduce health care costs, and advance sustainability. He 
2 
asserts his unique knowledge and expertise in health science will contribute to innovative training 
methods to cure and prevent many diseases. He further asserts that by establishing fitness centers, 
wellness clinics, and related businesses in economically distressed areas that his proposed endeavor 
has significant potential to employ U.S. workers. He also generally claims the proposed endeavor will 
broadly enhance societal welfare and is described as having national importance by a government 
entity. 
The Petitioner submitted an expert opinion letter that highlights his experience and notes the demand 
for exercise physiologists in the United States, as well as the importance of regular physical activity 
to individuals and the government. He also submitted seven letters of recommendation that generally 
speak to his character and professional experience. Finally, the Petitioner submitted articles relating 
to chronic diseases, obesity, and exercise, as well as general information regarding exercise 
physiologists. 
We acknowledge the evidence of the Petitioner's education and experience in the field of exercise 
physiology, including the information contained in his resume and letters of recommendation, as well 
as his claim on appeal that this evidence shows a measure of past success that establishes his proposed 
endeavor will have an effect on the United States as a whole. This evidence, however, relates to 
whether the Petitioner is well positioned to advance his proposed endeavor rather than whether his 
proposed endeavor is nationally important. Similarly, we note the articles he provided that discuss the 
importance of exercise and the role exercise physiologists may play in improving overall health. As 
noted above, however, our focus in assessing national importance is on the specific endeavor that the 
Petitioner proposes to undertake and its prospective impact rather than the importance of the industry 
or profession in which the individual will work. See id. at 889. 
Here, the Petitioner has not offered sufficient information and evidence to demonstrate his work as an 
exercise physiologist and entrepreneur would extend beyond his clients, or that the services he will 
provide offer original innovations to advance, or otherwise have national or global implications in, the 
field of exercise physiology commensurate with national importance. The Petitioner's general 
assertions in his professional plans regarding the contributions his proposed endeavor may make to 
improving overall health lack sufficient probative detail and are not corroborated in the record to 
establish the asserted contributions would have broader implications in the field of exercise physiology 
or would have other broader prospective impact. Additionally, we note the letters of recommendation 
and articles submitted by the Petitioner do not address the specific services the Petitioner would 
provide as an exercise physiologist or his plans for establishing fitness centers, wellness clinics, and 
related businesses, nor do they discuss with sufficient specificity the impact or broader implications 
of those plans to corroborate the claimed impact he asserts would result from his specific endeavor. 
Similarly, while the Petitioner generally claims his proposed endeavor would support economic 
growth and create new employment opportunities, he does not explain and has not provided sufficient 
evidence showing how this would be accomplished or the scale of any potential economic impact his 
proposed endeavor may have. Consequently, the record is insufficient to establish his proposed 
endeavor has significant potential to employ U.S. workers or has other substantial positive economic 
effects. Accordingly, we find the Petitioner has not established that his proposed endeavor is 
nationally important. 
3 
III. CONCLUSION 
The Petitioner has not met the requisite first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework, requiring 
that he demonstrate his proposed endeavor is nationally important. He therefore has not established 
he is eligible for or otherwise merits a national interest waiver as a matter of discretion. 
As noted above, the Director also concluded that the Petitioner did not establish that he was well 
positioned to advance his proposed endeavor, or 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, as are required under 
prongs two and three of the Dhanasar analytical framework. While the Petitioner also contests these 
conclusions on appeal, since our determination that he did not establish that his proposed endeavor is 
nationally important is dispositive of his appeal, we decline to reach and hereby reserve the appellate 
arguments on these issues. See INSv. Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. 24, 25 (1976) (per curiam) (holding that 
agencies are not required to make "purely advisory findings" on issues that are unnecessary to the 
ultimate decision). 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
4