dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Finance

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: FEB. 22, 2024 In Re: 29847412 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, a treasurer and controller, seeks classification as a member of the professions holding 
an advanced degree. See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 203(b )(2), 8 U.S.C. 
§ 1153(b )(2). The Petitioner also seeks a national interest waiver of the job offer requirement that is 
attached to this EB-2 immigrant classification. See section 203(b )(2)(B)(i) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 
§ 1153(b )(2)(B)(i). 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, concluding that the Petitioner had not 
established that a waiver of the required job offer, and thus of the labor certification, would be in the 
national interest. 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 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. 
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. Next, a 
petitioner must then demonstrate they merit a discretionary waiver of the job offer requirement "in the 
national interest." Section 203(b)(2)(B)(i) of the Act. Matter of Dhanasar , 26 I&N Dec. 884, 889 
(AAO 2016) provides that USCIS may, as matter of discretion, 1 grant a national interest waiver if the 
petitioner shows: 
1 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). 
• 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. 
II. ANALYSIS 
The Director's decision did not render a determination as to whether the Petitioner qualifies as a 
member of the professions holding an advanced degree or as an individual of exceptional 
ability. Instead, the decision only addressed the Petitioner's eligibility for a national interest waiver. 
Therefore, the issue for consideration on appeal is whether the Petitioner has established that a waiver of 
the requirement of a job offer, and thus a labor certification, would be in the national interest. For the 
reasons discussed below, we conclude that the Petitioner has not sufficiently demonstrated the national 
importance of his proposed endeavor under the first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework. 2 
The first prong, substantial merit and national importance, focuses on the specific endeavor that the 
noncitizen proposes to undertake. See Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. The endeavor's merit may be 
demonstrated in a range of areas such as business, entrepreneurialism, science, technology, culture, 
health, or education. In determining whether the proposed endeavor has national importance, we 
consider its potential prospective impact. 
In a professional plan submitted with the petition, the Petitioner stated that he intends to work as a 
treasurer and controller in the United States. Specifically, he stated as follows: 
My career plan in the United States is to continue my career by working as a Treasurer 
and Controller. I intend to work with companies in various industries by applying my 
treasurer and business controllership expertise to develop feasible financial policies, 
negotiate debts, maximize profitability, and seize new investment and market 
opportunities abroad on behalf of American companies. 
If my waiver is granted, I will contribute directly to the business sector, helping 
companies plan, direct, and coordinate their financial targets. My plan is of national 
importance to the U.S. because there is a high demand for professionals in my field and 
because without proper account management and controllership, companies will not be 
able to properly meet their business goals and remain sustainable. Many businesses in 
the U.S. are struggling to find the talent they need to handle general controllership and 
treasurer duties. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), employment of 
finance professionals, which include treasurers and controllers is projected to grow up 
to 19 percent up to 2028, adding around 104,700 new jobs. This growth is much faster 
than the average for all occupations. I can help fill this demand by offering my readily 
available financial expertise. 
2 Because the Petitioner has not demonstrated his eligibility for a national interest waiver on appeal, we need not remand 
the decision for the Director to determine whether he qualifies for the underlying EB-2 visa classification. 
2 
My specific endeavor will potentially impact the U.S. in the following ways: 
• Providing treasurer, account management and business controllership services 
to U.S. companies and financial departments; 
• Researching financial markets, conducting financial analysis, creating as well 
as improving financial and controllership policies; 
• Managing budgets and expense accounts; 
• Negotiating debts, collections and payment plans to help improve the financial 
health of companies; 
• Developing, improving and managing expense and collection systems to better 
account for all costs and obtain debt repayment; 
• Analyzing budget reports, accounts and financial documents to help companies 
meet their goals; and 
• Create U.S. jobs through managing companies' finances, allowing them to 
collect on debts, save money and make better investments. 
The initial filing also included copies of the Petitioner's academic credentials and industry articles and 
reports in support of his eligibility. 
The Director issued a request for evidence (RFE), noting that the Petitioner's evidence was insufficient 
to establish that his proposed endeavor has substantial merit and national importance. Specifically, 
the Director determined that the Petitioner had not thoroughly described the proposed endeavor to 
establish its substantial merit nor had he demonstrated that the proposed endeavor would impact the 
regional or national population at a level consistent with national importance. As a result, the Director 
requested a detailed description of the proposed endeavor in order to evaluate the Petitioner's request 
for a national interest waiver under the Dhanasar framework. 
In response, the Petitioner's counsel submitted a letter claiming that the Petitioner's proposed 
endeavor "is national in scope" because it will "generate substantial ripple effects upon key 
commercial and business activities on behalf of the United States - namely, serving the financial, 
assets and business management and business functions [ of] U.S. companies." Counsel further 
emphasized the Petitioner's professional history and experience, noting that he is uniquely qualified 
to advance his proposed endeavor. 
The Petitioner also submitted an updated professional plan restating his intent to continue using his 
expertise and knowledge in the finance, human resources, and operations fields. Specifically, the 
Petitioner stated that he can "provide his expertise in financial analysis, account management, and 
treasurer and business controllership" because he plans to "continuously pursue technical knowledge" 
and "enhance[ e] the skills [he] has acquired throughout his career." In support of this assertion, he 
submitted testimonial letters and additional industry articles and reports. 
In denying the petition, the Director determined that the Petitioner provided insufficient descriptions 
and documentary evidence to identify his proposed endeavor with specificity, and therefore had not 
established the proposed endeavor's substantial merit and national importance. The Director noted 
that the record contained insufficient evidence to demonstrate that the Petitioner's work would impact 
the regional or national population at a level consistent with national importance, and further noted 
3 
that the Petitioner did not demonstrate that the benefits of his proposed U.S. employment would reach 
beyond his employers and their clients to affect his field or the United States more broadly. The 
Director further concluded that the record did not satisfy the second and third Dhanasar prongs, as 
required. See Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 888-91. 
On appeal, counsel for the Petitioner asserts that USCIS "did not apply the proper standard of proof 
in this case, instead imposing a stricter standard, and erroneously applied the law, to the detriment of 
the Appellant." The Petitioner also asserts, through counsel, that the Director disregarded the evidence 
submitted, and provides a brief that emphasizes his qualifications as a treasurer and controller in the 
finance industry and asserts that the evidence of record establishes the substantial merit and national 
importance of the proposed endeavor. 
For the reasons provided below, we agree with the Director that the Petitioner has not demonstrated 
the national importance of the proposed endeavor under the first prong of the Dhanasar analytical 
framework. 
With respect to the standard of proof in this matter, a petitioner must establish that they meet each 
eligibility requirement of the benefit sought by a preponderance of the evidence. Matter ofChawathe, 
25 I& N Dec. at 375-76. In other words, a petitioner must show that what they claim is "more likely 
than not" or "probably" true. To determine whether a petitioner has met their burden under the 
preponderance standard, USCIS considers not only the quantity, but also the quality (including 
relevance, probative value, and credibility) of the evidence. Id. at 376; Matter ofE-M-, 20 I&N Dec. 
77, 79-80 (Comm'r 1989). 
The Petitioner described his endeavor in broad terms, indicating that he intends to fill a role in the 
business industry and claiming he has broad knowledge in a variety of fields including banking, 
finance, investments, marketing, operations, sales, business administration, business analytics, 
business development, human resources, market research, talent development, and compliance and 
insurance. Overall, we have insufficient information concerning the proposed endeavor with which 
to determine whether it has substantial merit because the Petitioner's proposed endeavor has not been 
clearly defined. We therefore agree with the Director's determination that the Petitioner did not submit 
persuasive evidence to support a finding of substantial merit. The Petitioner bears the burden to both 
affirmatively establish eligibility under the Dhanasar framework, of which substantial merit is one piece, 
and establish his eligibility by a preponderance of the evidence. See Matter ofChawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 
at 376. 
In determining national importance, the relevant question is not the importance of the industry or 
profession in which the individual will work; instead, we focus on the "the specific endeavor that the 
foreign national proposes to undertake." See Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. In Dhanasar, we further 
noted that "we look for broader implications" of the proposed endeavor and that "[ a ]n undertaking 
may have national importance for example, because it has national or even global implications within 
a particular field." Id. We also stated that"[ 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. Further, 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. In Dhanasar, we 
4 
determined that the petitioner's teaching act1v1t1es did not rise to the level of having national 
importance because they would not impact his field more broadly. Id. at 893. 
We agree with the Director that the Petitioner has not provided sufficient documentation or 
explanation concerning how his proposed endeavor has national importance. The purpose of the 
national interest waiver is not to afford the Petitioner an opportunity to engage in a job search or further 
his own career while only adding ancillary benefits to the nation. Although he has many ideas, it 
remains unclear as to what specifically his proposed endeavor involves aside from securing a job as 
either a treasurer and controller, or in one of the numerous fields in which he claims to have broad 
knowledge. In Dhanasar, we held that a petitioner must identify "the specific endeavor that the foreign 
national proposes to undertake." See id. at 889. While it may include one or more of the positions or 
fields outlined above, we conclude that the Petitioner has not provided a specific or consistent 
proposed endeavor activity such that we can determine its national importance. 
On appeal, the Petitioner contends that the Director did not duly consider certain pieces of evidence, such 
as his resume and experience, his professional plan, his work in the field, letters of recommendation, and 
industry articles and reports, and relies primarily upon the evidence and arguments previously submitted. 
While we acknowledge the Petitioner's appellate claims, we nevertheless conclude that the 
documentation in the record does not sufficiently establish the national importance of the proposed 
endeavor as required by the first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework. 3 
For example, the Petitioner submitted letters of support that speak to his character and his talents in 
the field. A letter from.________ __,of.__________ ~ endorses the Petitioner and 
asserts that his language skills in Portuguese and Spanish helped expand the company's business into 
international markets. A letter from attests to the Petitioner's character, noting that 
he and his wife hosted the Petitioner in their home in I I when he was a foreign exchange student 
from July 1996 to July 1997. Although both writers praise the Petitioner's character and language 
abilities, and generally state that he is experienced in the field of business, neither author discussed 
the Petitioner's specific proposed endeavor. Instead, the authors primarily focused on the Petitioner's 
character and skills. Neither the letters nor any other evidence within the record provide insight into 
how the Petitioner's endeavor to work as a treasurer and controller for U.S. companies will positively 
impact the region or the industry beyond his employers and their clients. Again, in determining 
national importance, the relevant question is not the importance of the industry or profession in which 
the individual will work; instead we focus on the "the specific endeavor that the foreign national 
proposes to undertake." Id. 
The Petitioner also claims that his proposed endeavor has national importance because the United 
States faces a significant national shortage of business professionals. In addition, the Petitioner asserts 
that business professionals and the financial sector are extremely important to the economy and that 
his proposed endeavor will offer substantial positive economic impacts. In support of these arguments, 
he offered numerous articles and industry reports discussing the U.S. business industry and financial 
sector. While these articles and reports provide useful background information, we examine the 
endeavor itself to evaluate its broader impact. These materials do not specifically describe the 
Petitioner's proposed endeavor or its potential impact, but rather amount to background information 
3 While we do not discuss each piece of evidence individually, we have reviewed and considered each one. 
5 
about general subjects. Furthermore, in determining national importance, the relevant question is not 
the importance of the industry or profession in which the individual will work; instead we focus on 
the "the specific endeavor that the foreign national proposes to undertake." Id. at 889. Here, the 
Petitioner has not established how his individual employment would affect national business and 
finance employment levels or the U.S. economy more broadly consistent with national importance. 
Moreover, it is important to note that the shortage of business professionals does not render his 
proposed endeavor nationally important under the Dhanasar framework. In fact, such shortages of 
qualified workers are directly addressed by the U.S. Department of Labor through the labor 
certification process. 
The Petitioner's proposal to fill a vacant treasurer and/or controller position, or a general position 
within the finance, human resources, or operations field at an existing U.S. company, appears to benefit 
the Petitioner's potential employer(s) and their clients. However, the record does not establish how 
providing such services working at a single company within the U.S. business industry may have 
"national or even global implications within a particular field, such as those resulting from certain 
improved manufacturing processes or medical advances" or broader implications, such as "significant 
potential to employ U.S. workers or ... other substantial positive economic effects, particularly in an 
economically depressed area." Id. at 889-90. Because the record does not establish how the 
Petitioner's endeavor may have national or even global implications within a particular field, broader 
implications, or other substantial positive economic effects, it does not establish the proposed endeavor 
has national importance. See id. 
Finally, the Petitioner's reliance throughout the record on his academic achievements and prior 
employment history is misplaced. Although an individual's academic and prior employment history 
are material the second Dhanasar prong - whether an individual is well positioned to advance a 
proposed endeavor - they are immaterial to the first Dhanasar prong, which pertains to whether the 
prospective endeavor has both substantial merit and national importance. See id. at 888-91. 
The evidence of record does not demonstrate that the endeavor realistically has significant potential 
to employ U.S. workers or otherwise offers substantial positive economic benefits for the United 
States. Consequently, the record does not establish the substantial merit or national importance of the 
proposed endeavor as required by the first prong of the Dhanasar precedent decision, and the 
Petitioner has not demonstrated eligibility for a national interest waiver. Because the identified reason 
for dismissal is dispositive of the Petitioner's appeal, we decline to reach and hereby reserve the 
Petitioner's remaining arguments concerning eligibility under the Dhanasar framework. See INS v. 
Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. 24, 25 (1976) (stating that agencies are not required to make "purely advisory 
findings" on issues that are unnecessary to the ultimate decision); see also Matter ofL-A-C-, 26 I&N 
Dec. 516, 526 n.7 (BIA 2015) (declining to reach alternative issues on appeal where an applicant is 
otherwise ineligible). 
III. CONCLUSION 
As the Petitioner has not met the 
requisite first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework, we conclude 
that he has not established he is eligible for or otherwise merits a national interest waiver as a matter 
of discretion. 
6 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
7