dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Finance

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: WLY 20, 2023 In Re: 27423209 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, a controller, 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 EB-2 classification. See Immigration and 
Nationality Act (the Act) section 203(b)(2), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(2). 
The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the Petitioner qualified 
for classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree, but that he 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. 
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 Christo 's, Inc., 26 l&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. Once a 
petitioner demonstrates eligibility as either a member of the professions holding an advanced degree 
or an individual of exceptional ability, they must then establish that they merit 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 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 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 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 found that the Petitioner qualifies as a member of the professions holding an advanced 
degree. The remaining issue to be determined 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. 
With respect to his proposed endeavor, the Petitioner indicated that he intends "to work in the United 
States as a Business Controller providing controllership services with a focus on management and budget, 
equity, economic, tax and financial coordination of startups and small and medium-sized companies in 
various segments." He stated that he planned "to assist in making business decisions, providing the 
improvement of financial performance and assets and reducing costs through the identification and 
reduction of operational failures, better allocation of financial resources, strategic planning, among other 
benefits." The Petitioner further asserted that his proposed services include financial and budget 
management; monitoring business data; tax planning; information collection, storage, and analysis; 
preparation of reports; strategy studies; gap identification; finding and correcting mistakes; and 
digitization of accounting and financial processes. 
The record includes information about the job outlook for financial managers, treasurers, and 
controllers. In addition, the Petitioner provided articles discussing the effect of the COVID-19 
pandemic on the U.S. economy, safety as part of a business recovering strategy, and the growth of 
small businesses attributable to Biden Administration initiatives. He also submitted information about 
small businesses as contributors to the economic recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic, small 
business financial outcomes during the onset of COVID-19, strategies for repositioning controllership 
after the pandemic, and Biden Administration programs contributing to new small business growth. 
The record therefore supports the Director's determination that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor has 
substantial merit. 
Furthermore, the Petitioner provided letters of support from A-H-, J-S-, G-M-, and P-J- discussing his 
controller skills, financial management knowledge, and business projects. The Petitioner's skills, 
knowledge, and prior work in his field, however, relate to the second prong of the Dhanasar 
framework, which "shifts the focus from the proposed endeavor to the foreign national." Id. at 890. 
The issue here is whether the specific endeavor that he proposes to undertake has national importance 
under Dhanasar's first prong. 
The Petitioner also submitted an "Expert Opinion Letter" from Dr. J-B-, a professor of finance at 
!University, in support of his national interest waiver. Dr. J-B- asserted that the 
Petitioner's proposed work is of national importance because his generic occupation of accountant 
and the field in which he works stand "to help small and medium-sized enterprises in the U.S. improve 
operations and achieve better productivity and profitability levels, therefore generating revenues 
within the country and creating employment opportunities." Dr. J-B- farther contended that "[g]rowth 
supported by small and medium-sized enterprises pays dividends for all U.S. citizens by increasing 
2 
I 
tax revenues to the federal and state governments .... " The issue here, however , is not the national 
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." Id. at 889. The letter from 
Dr. J-B- does not contain sufficient information and explanation , nor does the record include adequate 
corroborating evidence, to show that the Petitioner's specific proposed work as a controller offers 
broader implications in his field or substantial positive economic effects for our nation that rise to the 
level of national importance . 
In the decision denying the petition , the Director determined that the Petitioner had not established the 
national importance of his proposed endeavor. The Director stated that the Petitioner had not 
demonstrated that his undertaking stands to sufficiently extend beyond his clients "to impact the industry 
or field more broadly." The Director also indicated that the Petitioner had not shown his proposed work 
"has significant potential to employ U.S . workers or otherwise offers substantial positive economic effects 
for our nation." 
On appeal, petitioner contends that his proposed endeavor stands to "make companies more organized 
and profitable , favor the maintenance of the companies' operations, and, therefore, contribute to the U.S. 
economic growth with the increase of their revenues , competitiveness of the market, increase in 
investments and generation ofjobs and income." He asserts that "business controllership is an effective 
way for a company to maintain financial stability and to also rebuild financially distressed corporations 
to avoid greater negative impacts on the economy." Additionally, the Petitioner indicates that his 
undertaking offers "accurate and reliable information to assist in making business decisions, providing 
the improvement of financial performance and assets and reducing costs through the identification and 
reduction of operation failures, better allocation of financial resources, strategic planning , among others." 
He also claims that his proposed work "has national or even global implications within a particular field 
as Petitioner 's services can increase a company 's profits and revenue, as well as shape new strategies for 
companies considering the post-pandemic scenario and, consequently , help all levels of government 
within the U.S. collect taxes, whether through income taxation or business taxation ." 
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." See Dhanasar , 26 I&N Dec . at 889. In Dhana sar, 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 
implication s 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 , particula rly in an 
economically depres sed area, for instance , may well be understood to have national importance ." Id. 
at 890. 
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. While the 
Petitioner's statements reflect his intention to provide valuable accounting and financial management 
services for his employer or busine ss cli ents, he has not offered sufficient information and evidence 
to demon strate that the prospecti ve impact of his propo sed endeavor rises to the level of national 
importance. In Dhana sar, 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. Id. at 893. 
3 
Here, we conclude the Petitioner has not shown that his proposed endeavor stands to sufficiently 
extend beyond his employer or clientele to impact the financial management field, the accounting 
industry, or the U.S. econom y more broadly at a level commensurate with national importance. 
Furthermore, the Petitioner has not demonstrated that the specific endeavor he proposes to undertake 
has significant potential to employ U.S . workers or otherwise offers substantial positive economic 
effects for our nation. Without sufficient information or evidence regarding any projected U.S. economic 
impact or job creation attributable to his future work, the record does not show that benefits to the regional 
or national economy resulting from the Petitioner's business projects would reach the level of"substantial 
positive economic effects" contemplated by Dhanasar. Id. at 890. Accordingly, the Petitioner 's 
proposed work does not meet the first prong of the Dhanasar framework . 
Because the documentation in the record does not establish the national importance of his proposed 
endeavor as required by the first prong of the Dhanasar precedent decision, the Petitioner has not 
demonstrated eligibility for a national interest waiver. Since this issue is dispositive of the Petitioner's 
appeal, we decline to reach and hereby reserve the appellate arguments regarding his eligibility under 
the third prong outlined in Dhanasar. 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 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. The appeal wi11 be dismissed for the above stated reasons, with each considered as an 
independent and alternate basis for the decision. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
4