dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Facilities Management

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: DEC. 20, 2023 In Re: 29049859 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, a facilities manager, seeks employment-based second preference (EB-2) immigrant 
classification as amember of the professions holding an advanced degree, as well as anational 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). U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services 
(USCIS) may grant this discretionary waiver of the required job offer, and thus of a labor certification, 
when it is in the national interest to do so. 
The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the petition. The Director concluded that the record 
did not demonstrate his eligibility for the requested national interest waiver. 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 apreponderance 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/Chri sta 's , Inc., 26 l&N Dec. 537, 537 n.2 (AAO 2015). Upon de nova review, 
we will dismiss the appeal. 
I. LAW 
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 U.S. academic or professional degree or a foreign equivalent degree above 
that of a bachelor's degree. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2). A U.S. bachelor's degree or a foreign equivalent 
degree followed by five years of progressive experience in the specialty is the equivalent of a master's 
degree. Id. 
Once a petitioner demonstrates eligibility for the underlying classification, the petitioner must then 
establish eligibility for 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 USCIS may, as 
matter of discretion1, 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 
The Petitioner proposes to establish a facilities management services business in the United States 
having previously worked as a facilities coordinator, administrative manager, and property security 
guard in Brazil. 
A. Member of Professions Holding an Advanced Degree 
The Director determined the Petitioner is eligible for the EB-2 classification as an advanced degree 
professional. Upon de nova review, we find the record does not establish the Petitioner's eligibility 
for the underlying EB-2 classification. 
The Petitioner submitted evidence to qualify as a member of the professions holding an advanced 
degree. To qualify as a member of the professions, an individual must meet "one of the occupations 
listed in section 10I(a)(32) of the Act, as well as any occupation for which a United States 
baccalaureate degree or its foreign equivalent is the minimum requirement for entry into the 
occupation.'' 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2). 2 The record does not establish that the Petitioner's occupation 
as a facilities manager is a statutory listed occupation or requires the minimum of a U.S. bachelor's 
degree or its foreign equivalent for entry into the occupation. 
The Petitioner maintains that his position as the owner and manager of his facilities management 
services business comports with the duties and responsibilities of those employed in the "Facilities 
Managers" SOC Code 11-3013 occupation. The U.S. Department of Labor states that the education 
requirements for this occupation are "training in vocational schools, related on-the-job experience, or 
an associate's degree." See U.S. Department of Labor, O*NET Summary Report for "Facilities 
Managers," https://www.onetonline.org/link/summary/11-3013.00. Since a U.S. bachelor's degree or 
its foreign equivalent is not the minimum requirement for entry into the Petitioner's intended 
occupation of facilities manager, he has not established that he qualifies as a member of the 
professions. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2). 
Since the record does not show that the Petitioner qualifies as a member of the professions, he has not 
established that he is eligible for the EB-2 classification as a member of the professions possessing an 
advanced degree. We therefore withdraw the Director's findings for the Petitioner's eligibility for the 
underlying EB-2 classification. 
1 See also Poursina v. USC1S, 936 F.3d 868 (9th Cir. 2019) (finding USCIS' decision to grant or deny a national interest 
waiver to be discretionary in nature). 
2 Section 101 (a)(32) of the Act states "[t]he term 'profession' shall include but not limited to architects, engineers, lawyers, 
physicians, surgeons, and teachers in elementary or secondary schools, colleges, academics, or seminaries." 
2 
B. National Interest Waiver 
The Director determined that the Petitioner did not establish that a waiver of the requirement of a job 
offer, and thus a labor certification, would be in the national interest. The Director found that while 
the Petitioner demonstrated the proposed endeavor has substantial merit, he did not establish that the 
proposed endeavor is of national importance, as required by the first prong of the Dhanasar analytical 
framework. The Director further found that the Petitioner did not establish that he is well positioned 
to advance the proposed endeavor under the second Dhanasar prong, and 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 under the third Dhanasar prong. Upon de novo review, we agree with the Director's 
determination that the Petitioner did not demonstrate that a waiver of the labor certification would be 
in the national interest.3 
The first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework, substantial merit and national importance, 
focuses on the specific endeavor that a petitioner proposes to undertake. The endeavor's merit may 
be demonstrated in arange of areas, such as business, entrepreneurial ism, science, technology, culture, 
health, or education. In determining national importance, the relevant question is not the importance 
of the field, industry, or profession in which the individual will work; instead, we focus on the "the 
specific endeavor that the foreign national proposes to undertake." Matter of Dhanasar, 26 l&N Dec. 
at 889. 
The Petitioner's business plan states that his business would provide facilities management services 
to real estate owners and to small and medium-sized businesses in the property management, hotel, 
and walk-in clinic sectors of the,__________ ___.area of Florida. The business' services 
would include management of third-party providers, help-desk management, contract monitoring, 
computer aided facilities management systems, asset management, and interface with public utility 
providers, regulators, and public authorities. The business would also provide housekeeping and other 
soft services, such as landscaping, pool maintenance, waste management, pest control, and vending 
services; as well as, technical operations and maintenance, such as mechanical and electrical services, 
plumbing and drainage, fire control and fighting, critical engineering access control, and backup power 
generation. 
The business plan further describes the Petitioner's intent to expand the business through the 
development of a software application platform. The software application would suppmi the business' 
"operation and facilitate contact between customers and professionals registered on the platform, in 
addition to managing schedules and monitoring all stages of the service." The business intends to 
contract a software developer to create the software application with initial features for payment 
management and customer reviews. The business would later expand the software application to allow 
customers to monitor schedules and to obtain educational information on property maintenance, 
safety, and environmental and sustainability issues. We agree with the Director that the Petitioner's 
endeavor has substantial merit. 
With respect to the national importance of the proposed endeavor, the Director found that the Petitioner 
did not submit "sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the prospective impact of his proposed 
3 While we may not discuss every document submitted, we have reviewed and considered each one. 
3 
endeavor rises to the level of national importance.... USCIS finds that the [Petitioner] has not shown 
that his proposed endeavor ... stands to sufficiently extend beyond his company and his clients to 
impact the industry or field more broadly." The Director further stated, "[The Petitioner] has not 
demonstrated that the specific endeavor he proposed to undertake has significant potential to employ 
U.S. workers or otherwise offers substantial positive economic effects for our nation." Therefore, the 
Director found that the Petitioner did not meet his burden in establishing the national importance 
element of the first prong of the Dhanasar framework. 
The Petitioner contends on appeal that his proposed endeavor "has implications beyond [his] potential 
employers/clients and reaches the level ofnational importance." He argues that his proposed endeavor 
"is not just based on a vague record, but on a solid structure, with well-established technical and 
strategic foundations." (emphasis omitted). The Petitioner points to his professional experience and 
expertise to show he "will be ready to meet the needs of consumers, offering high-quality services and 
innovative solutions." He further argues his proposed endeavor has economic benefits to the local 
underutilized business communities of Florida and to the United States since the business would 
strengthen the finances of businesses, create jobs, and pay taxes. The Petitioner further argues the 
national importance of his proposed endeavor based on his business contributing to U.S. government 
initiatives supporting immigrant workers and entrepreneurs, and his business filling a need in the 
facilities management field due to the expected growth in the industry. Upon de nova review, we find 
the record does not demonstrate that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor satisfies the national 
importance element of Dhanasar 's first prong. 
The standard of proof in this proceeding is a preponderance of the evidence, meaning that a petitioner 
must show that what is claimed is "more likely than not" or "probably" true. Matter of Chawathe, 25 
l&N Dec. at 375-76. To determine whether a petitioner has met the burden under the preponderance 
standard, we consider not only the quantity, but also the quality (including relevance, probative value, 
and credibility) of the evidence. Id.; Matter of E-M-, 20 l&N Dec. 77, 79-80 (Comm'r 1989). Here, 
the Director properly analyzed the Petitioner's documentation and weighed the evidence to evaluate 
the Petitioner's eligibility by a preponderance of the evidence. 
The Petitioner argues on appeal that recommendation letters from professionals in the industry 
demonstrate his "impact and relevance in the field of facilities services" and that the professionals 
"attest to [his] expertise, leadership, and significant contributions to the industry." ( emphasis omitted). 
The recommendation letters are from his current and former employers and colleagues, mainly 
discussing the Petitioner's work experiences as a facilities coordinator, an administrative manager, a 
property security guard, and a professional training course instructor. The letters explain the 
Petitioner's knowledge and professionalism in those positions conveying his organizational, 
communication, and management skills and the importance of his work to his employers and their 
customers. 
While we acknowledge that the Petitioner has experience providing facilities management and 
business administration services, the Petitioner's reliance on his professional experience and 
knowledge to establish the national importance of his proposed endeavor is misplaced. His 
professional experience and knowledge relate to the second prong of the Dhanasar framework, which 
"shifts the focus from the proposed endeavor to the foreign national." Matter of Dhanasar, 26 l&N 
Dec. at 890. The issue here is whether the specific endeavor that the Petitioner proposes to undertake 
4 
has national importance under Dhanasar 's first prong. To evaluate whether the Petitioner's proposed 
endeavor satisfies the national importance requirement, we look to evidence documenting the 
"potential prospective impact" of his work. See id. at 889. The Petitioner has not offered sufficient 
information and evidence based on these recommendation letters to demonstrate the prospective 
impact of his proposed endeavor will rise to the level of national importance, rather than only 
impacting his clients. The letters do not demonstrate that the Petitioner's work will have national or 
global implications in the field of facilities management. 
The Petitioner argues on appeal that his proposed endeavor will have economic benefits to the local 
and national economies. He claims that the business' software application "will be an innovative 
platform facilitating interaction between service providers and consumers" which "will significantly 
benefit the economy as a whole, not limited to a specific region but the entire national territory." The 
Petitioner also claims the software application will stimulate entrepreneurship and job creation for the 
self-employed and small and medium-sized businesses promoting their services. He further argues 
that his business could "positively impact the entire regional production chain" by improving the 
productivity and efficiency of local businesses and organization thereby creating demand for other 
related sectors, such as equipment, logistics, and technology suppliers, boosting regional economic 
development." The business would have "a direct impact on job creation and on moving the regional 
economy" resulting "in a virtuous cycle ofregional economic growth." 
In Dhanasar, we determined that the petitioner's teaching activities did not rise to the level of having 
national importance because they would not impact his field more broadly. Matter of Dhanasar, 26 
l&N Dec. at 893. Here, the record does not demonstrate that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor will 
substantially benefit the field of facilities management, as contemplated by Dhanasar: "[a]n 
undertaking may have national importance for example, because it has national or even global 
implications within a particular field, such as those resulting from certain improved manufacturing 
processes or medical advances." Id. The evidence does not suggest that the Petitioner's facilities 
management services business would impact the facilities management field more broadly or provide 
the claimed economic benefits to the United States. The record does not indicate that the software 
application has been created, but instead indicates the Petitioner will be seeking advice from 
professionals in the future for the development of the proposed software application. Besides general 
assertions, the record does not show that the business' proposed software application or its facilities 
management services would provide innovations in the field or economic benefits beyond the business 
and its clients. 
With the petition, the Petitioner submitted a business plan describing the business and its potential 
economic, social, and environmental contributions to the United States and local communities. The 
buf ness olan explains that the business would be established in an underutilized business community 
of 1, Florida and would serve small and medium-sized businesses in that community. The 
business plan contends the business would create direct and indirect jobs for U.S. workers in 
underutilized business communities; increase income to those communities; enhance production 
chains for the business' corporate clients; generate taxes for local and national social services; provide 
sustainable projects and services; and transfer the Petitioner's professional knowledge to its clients, 
partners, and suppliers. 
5 
However, the record does not demonstrate that the proposed endeavor would provide economic, 
societal, or environmental benefits that rise to the level of national importance. The business plan 
projects that in five years the business will create 14 direct jobs and approximately 172 indirect jobs; 
pay over two million dollars in wages and commissions; and generate almost seven hundred thousand 
in taxes. However, the record does not sufficiently detail the basis for its financial and staffing 
projections, or adequately explain how these projections will be realized. 
The Petitioner has not provided corroborating evidence to support his claims that his business' future 
staffing levels and business activities stand to Iprovide Isubstantial economic, societal, and 
environmental benefits to an underutilized area of Florida and the United States. The 
Petitioner's claims that his facilities management services business will benefit the U.S. economy and 
enhance societal welfare has not been established through independent and objective evidence. The 
Petitioner's statements are not sufficient to demonstrate his endeavor has the potential to provide 
economic, societal, and environmental benefits. The Petitioner must support his assertions with 
relevant, probative, and credible evidence. See Matter of Chawathe, 25 l&N Dec. at 376. 
The Petitioner expresses his desire to work with sustainable products in order to be environmentally 
~ble, and to contribute economically to the United States and underutilized business areas of 
L__J, Florida. However, he has not established with specific, probative evidence that his endeavor 
will have broader implications in his field, will have significant potential to employ U.S. workers, or 
will have other substantial positive economic, societal, and environmental effects to Florida or the 
United States. Even if we were to assume everything the Petitioner claims will happen, the record 
lacks evidence showing that creating 14 direct jobs and 172 indirect jobs; paying over two million 
dollars in wages and commissions; and generating over four hundred thousand dollars in almost seven 
hundred thousand in taxes over a five-year period rises to the level of national importance. Also, 
without sufficient documentary evidence that his proposed job duties as the owner and company 
manager for his business would impact the facilities management industry more broadly, rather than 
benefiting his business and his proposed clients, the Petitioner has not demonstrated by a 
preponderance of the evidence that his proposed endeavor is of national importance. 
The Petitioner also stresses the national importance of his proposed endeavor is evidenced through its 
advancement of U.S. government initiatives supporting immigrants in the U.S. workforce and 
immigrant entrepreneurs. The business plan provides an analysis of the economic benefits of U.S. 
immigration reform, an immigrant workforce, and immigrant entrepreneurs. The business plan also 
provides an analysis of the facilities management industry and the expected growth of the industry. 
Although the business plan includes citations for the Petitioner's assertions, he did not provide 
independent, objective evidence supporting his assertions. See id. Further, although we recognize the 
importance of the facilities management industry, related careers, and the significant contributions 
from immigrants who have become successful entrepreneurs, working as a facilities manager and 
starting a facilities management services business are insufficient to establish the national importance 
of the proposed endeavor. Instead of focusing on an industry or occupation, we focus on the "the 
specific endeavor that the foreign national proposes to undertake." See Matter of Dhanasar, 26 l&N 
Dec. at 889. 
We note that the record includes an o
1
inion froml I Ph.D., associate professor of 
marketing atl The opinion includes an analysis of the national importance 
6 
of the Petitioner's proposed endeavor stating, " [The Petitioner] will work in an area of substantial 
merit and national importance." (emphasis omitted). The opinion contends the Petitioner's proposed 
endeavor has national importance based on the expected job growth opportunities in the facilities 
management field and the importance of immigrant entrepreneurs to U.S. economic growth. However, 
stating that the Petitioner's work as an immigrant entrepreneur would support an important industry 
which is expected to have job growth is not sufficient to meet the "national importance" requirement 
under the Dhanasar framework. 
The opinion also stresses the importance of small and medium-sized businesses and the Petitioner's 
facilities management experience making him capable to "improve operations and achieve better 
productivity and profitability levels, therefore generating revenues within the country and creating 
employment opportunities." The opinion explains some of the services to be offered by the 
Petitioner's facilities management services business and the potential growth of the business through 
its intended software application. The opinion reiterates the business plan's projected jobs and 
finances, and based on these projections, the opinion states, "Therefore, the proposed endeavor has 
significant potential to employ U.S. workers and has other substantial positive economic effects." 
However, the opinion generally restates information provided in the business plan and does not explain 
the basis for these employment and financial projections. Also, the opinion's focus on the Petitioner's 
facilities management knowledge and experience does not show the national importance of his 
proposed endeavor, but instead relates to the second Dhanasar prong. 
The Petitioner does not demonstrate that his proposed endeavor extends beyond his business and his 
future clients to impact the field of facilities management or the U.S. economy more broadly at a level 
commensurate with national importance. Beyond general assertions, he has not demonstrated that the 
work he proposes to undertake as the owner and company manager of his proposed facilities 
management services business offers original innovations that contribute to advancements in his 
industry or otherwise has broader implications for his field. The economic and societal benefits that 
the Petitioner claims depend on numerous factors, and the Petitioner did not offer a sufficiently direct 
evidentiary tie between his proposed business' facilities management work and the claimed economic 
and societal results. 
Because the documentation in the record does not sufficiently establish the national importance of the 
Petitioner's proposed endeavor as required by the first prong of the Dhanasar precedent decision, he 
has not demonstrated eligibility for a national interest waiver. Since the identified basis for denial is 
dispositive of the Petitioner's appeal, we decline to reach and hereby reserve the Petitioner's appellate 
arguments regarding her eligibility under the second and third prongs. 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 alternative issues on appeal where an applicant is otherwise ineligible). 
Ill. CONCLUSION 
We withdraw the Director's finding that the Petitioner has established that he qualifies for the second­
preference employment visa as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree. In addition, 
7 
since he has not met the requisite first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework, we find that the 
Petitioner is not eligible for a national interest waiver as a matter of discretion. 
The appeal will be dismissed for the above stated reasons. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
8