dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Finance

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: DEC. 8, 2023 In Re: 28566204 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, a financial manager, seeks classification as a member of the professions holding an 
advanced degree. 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 attached to this EB-2 
classification. See section 203(b )(2)(B)(i) of the Act. 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 record did not 
establish that a waiver of the job offer requirement is 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 l&N Dec. 369, 375-76 (AAO 2010). We review the questions in this matter 
de novo. Matter of Christo '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. 
An advanced degree is any United States 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 United States bachelor's degree 
or 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 as either a member of the professions holding an advanced 
degree or an individual of exceptional ability, 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 statute nor the pertinent regulations define the term "national interest," Matter 
of Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. 884, 889 (AAO 2016), provides the framework for adjudicating national 
interest waiver petitions. Dhanasar states that USCIS may, as a matter of discretion, 1 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. 
II. ANALYSIS 
We will 
first address the Petitioner's qualification for the EB-2 classification. The Director found that 
the Petitioner qualifies for the EB-2 classification as an advanced degree professional, but did not 
explain the basis for this conclusion. The Petitioner claims that she has obtained the foreign equivalent 
of a bachelor's degree in law and an MBA (master of business administration) degree and has 
approximately 15 years of experience in real estate and finance. 2 
To establish the MBA degree, the Petitioner submitted evidence of completion of a "lato sensu" 
course certificate entitled "Executive MBA in Administration: real estate and civil construction 
business management" from the.__ _________ ____.in Brazil in 2016. However, according 
to the American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers (AACRAO) Electronic 
Database for Global Education (EDGE), a lato sensu course certificate is not necessarily evidence of 
completion of a graduate degree program. 3 The database states that lato sensu or "wide sense" 
graduate programs "lead toward a professional certificate, not to graduate degrees; graduate credits 
may be awarded." 4 The database contrasts this with stricto sensu or "strict sense" graduate programs 
which do lead toward graduate degrees. 5 Although the Petitioner submitted an evaluation of her 
academic credentials, the evaluator does not discuss this MBA certificate specifically, does not address 
the distinction between lato sensu and stricto sensu programs in Brazil, and does not explain why this 
lato sensu course certificate should be considered equivalent to a U.S. master's degree. Therefore, we 
conclude that the Petitioner has not established that her MBA certificate is the equivalent of an 
academic or professional degree above that of a bachelor's degree. See 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2). 
As noted above, the Petitioner also claims to have a bachelor's degree in law, and the record does 
establish that the Petitioner obtained the foreign equivalent of a bachelor's degree in law in 2003 in 
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 The Petitioner also submitted evidence of obtaining a title of technologist diploma in financial management, which the 
Petitioner states is equivalent to an associate's degree in the United States. Additional education in the field may be 
relevant in establishing whether a petitioner is well-positioned to advance their endeavor. Matter of Dhanasar, 
26 T&N Dec. at 890. However, because an associate's degree is not equivalent to a bachelor's degree or higher, it is not 
relevant in establishing eligibility for the EB-2 classification. See 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2). 
3 We consider EDGE to be a reliable source of information about foreign credential equivalencies. See Confluence Intern., 
Inc. v. Holder, Civil No. 08-2665 (DSD-JJG), 2009 WL 825793 (D. Minn. Mar. 27, 2009); Tisco Group, Inc. v. Napolitano, 
No. 09-cv-l 0072. 2010 WL 3464314 (E.D. Mich. Aug. 30, 2010); Sunshine Rehab Services, Inc. No. 09-13605. 2010 WL 
3325442 (E.D. Mich. Aug.20.2010). See also Viraj, LLC v. Holder, No. 2: 12-CV-00127-RWS, 2013 WL 1943431 (N.D. 
Ga. May 18, 2013). 
4 See https://www.aacrao.org/edge/country/glossary/brazil for more information. 
s Id. 
2 
Brazil. The Petitioner also submitted a letter from her employer stating that she has been employed 
with the organization since 2004, stating that she is the Financial and Administration Director of the 
organization, and describing her duties in that position. The letter is brief in its description of the 
Petitioner's current duties, and, although other documents in the record indicate that the Petitioner has 
held prior positions with the company, these are not described in the letter. Nevertheless, we conclude 
that the letter, in conjunction with the other evidence in the record such as letters of recommendation 
from colleagues and associates, is sufficient to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the 
Petitioner has obtained at least five years of progressive experience in real estate and finance. 
Therefore, the Petitioner has established that she has obtained the foreign equivalent of a bachelor's 
degree followed by at least five years of progressive experience in the specialty and thus qualifies for 
the EB-2 classification. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2). 
We tum next to the Petitioner's request for a national interest waiver under the Dhanasar framework. 
The Director concluded that the Petitioner established only the substantial merit of the proposed 
endeavor. The Director found that the Petitioner did not establish the national importance of the 
proposed endeavor, that she is well-positioned to advance it, or that, on balance, waiving the job offer 
requirement would benefit the United States. On appeal, the Petitioner submits additional evidence 
and a brief in which she asserts that she has established eligibility for a national interest waiver. 
The Petitioner's proposed endeavor is to create more affordable and environmentally sustainable 
housing. The Petitioner states that she will pursue her endeavor through a company that she has 
established in Florida which will offer advisory and consulting services to businesses and individuals 
in the homebuilding industry, specializing in affordable housing and environmentally sustainable 
projects. The Petitioner's business plan, submitted in response to the Director's request for evidence 
(RFE), states that the company will offer "a foll range of construction consulting services across the 
project duration, from project planning to execution and sales of developed properties." The business 
plan farther states that the company will provide market research services, locate properties suitable 
for affordable housing development, create project specifications, analyze microeconomic conditions 
of the target markets, and analyze real estate trends, government regulations, and subsidy programs. 
In determining whether a proposed endeavor has national importance, we consider its potential 
prospective impact. Matter ofDhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. An endeavor that has national or global 
implications within a particular field, such as those resulting from certain improved manufacturing 
processes or medical advances, may have national importance. Id. Additionally, an endeavor that is 
regionally focused may nevertheless have national importance, such as an endeavor that has significant 
potential to employ U.S. workers or has other substantial positive economic effects, particularly in an 
economically depressed area. Id. at 890. 
In finding that the Petitioner did not establish the national importance of the proposed endeavor, the 
Director found that there was insufficient evidence in the record to support the Petitioner's claims that 
the endeavor stands to "substantially enhance the U.S. business, real estate, and civil construction 
industries." The Director discussed the Petitioner's business plan and concluded that it did not 
demonstrate significant potential to employ U.S. workers or that the business would contribute to the 
national economy as claimed by the Petitioner. The Director concluded that the evidence did not 
demonstrate that the potential benefits of the Petitioner's work would extend beyond the company to 
impact the field more broadly. Finally, the Director noted that throughout the record the documents 
3 
emphasize the importance of the field in which the Petitioner works, but that in determining national 
importance, the analysis should focus on the impact of what the Petitioner intends to do rather than 
the occupational classification. 
On appeal, the Petitioner asserts that the Director did not sufficiently consider the economic benefits 
projected in the business plan. The Petitioner notes that the business plan projects that by year five 
the company will have six total employees and will pay nearly $350,000 in payroll taxes. The 
Petitioner also asserts that the company's business operations will have a "ripple effect" on the 
economy. The Petitioner states for example, "the spending by suppliers of materials and services and 
others to keep up with the business, and induced impacts such as spending of earnings ... , for example 
a construction worker buying lunch or groceries." Although the business plan states that the company 
will hire workers and thus pay payroll taxes, the Petitioner has not established that the creation of six 
jobs in five years would result in the type of "substantial positive economic effects" that are required 
for national importance. Matter ofDhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 890. Additionally, the evidence in the 
record does not quantify the claimed indirect economic impacts of the company or otherwise establish 
that they would be substantial. As such, we conclude that the record does not demonstrate that the 
economic impacts of the proposed endeavor stand to rise to the level of national importance. 
The Petitioner next asserts that the proposed endeavor will have a substantial impact on housing 
shortages. The Petitioner discusses the shortage of public housing and affordable housing in the 
United States and asserts that her endeavor will contribute significantly to addressing these problems 
in the United States. However, these claims are not supported by the evidence in the record. Although 
the Petitioner submitted articles and reports related to the lack of affordable housing in the United 
States, the U.S. housing market in general, and the impact ofreal estate on the economy, the Petitioner 
does not credibly explain how the Petitioner's construction consulting business would address or 
impact these issues in a manner that rises to the level of national importance. We agree with the 
Director that in determining whether a proposed endeavor has national importance, the relevant 
question is not the importance of the industry, field, or profession in which an individual will work; 
instead, to assess national importance, we focus on the "specific endeavor that the [ noncitizen] 
proposes to undertake." See id. at 889. 
The Petitioner also claims on appeal that the proposed endeavor will help companies implement 
sustainable construction methods. The Petitioner discusses on appeal the benefits of sustainable 
construction methods in general, claiming that it promotes healthier living, reduces waste, boosts the 
economy, promotes cost efficiency, decreases costs, and reduces carbon footprint. The Petitioner also 
discusses statistics related to the rising demand for sustainable construction methods and the 
environmental impacts of the construction industry. While the Petitioner has submitted articles and 
reports related to these topics, similar to the Petitioner's claims related to affordable housing, the 
evidence does not credibly demonstrate how the Petitioner's endeavor would address or impact this 
issue in a manner commensurate with national importance. 
Finally, we conclude that the additional evidence submitted on appeal does not establish the national 
importance of the proposed endeavor. The Petitioner submits four additional articles on appeal related 
to affordable housing and sustainable construction. The Petitioner does not discuss or address this 
evidence on appeal as it relates to the national importance of the proposed endeavor. Moreover, rather 
than providing additional evidence that helps demonstrate the potential prospective impact of the 
4 
Petitioner's specific endeavor, the evidence is cumulative of the articles and reports already in the 
record that relate to affordable housing and sustainable construction in general. 
Although the Petitioner asserts on appeal that the Director did not sufficiently consider the potential 
economic benefits of the Petitioner's company or its potential impact on affordable housing and the 
environment, upon review of the record we conclude that the Petitioner has not sufficiently established 
that these potential impacts rise to the level of national importance. Because the documentation in the 
record does not establish national importance as required by the first prong of the Dhanasar 
framework, the Petitioner has not demonstrated eligibility for a national interest waiver. We reserve 
our opinion regarding whether the record satisfies the second and third Dhanasar prongs. 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 of L-A-C-, 
26 I&N Dec. 516, 526 n. 7 (BIA 2015) ( declining to reach alternative issues on appeal where the 
applicant is otherwise ineligible). 
III. CONCLUSION 
The Petitioner has not met the requisite first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework. We 
therefore conclude that the Petitioner has not established that she is eligible for or otherwise merits a 
national interest waiver as a matter of discretion. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
5