dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Finance

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 22143862 
Appeal of Nebraska Service Center Decision 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: SEPT . 12, 2022 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker (Advanced Degree, Exceptional Ability, National 
Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner , a financial executive , seeks second preference 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 Nebraska Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the Petitioner qualified 
for classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree , but had not established 
that a waiver of the required job offer, and thus of the labor certification , would be in the national 
interest. 
On appeal, the Petitioner asserts he is eligible for a national interest waiver. 
In these proceedings, it is the petitioner's burden to establish eligibility for the immigration benefit 
sought. Section 291 of the Act , 8 U.S .C. § 1361; Matter of Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369, 375 (AAO 
2010) . 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. Because this classification requires that the 
individual's services be sought by a U.S . employer, a separate showing is required to establish that a 
waiver of the job offer requirement is in the national interest. 
Section 203(b) of the Act sets out this sequential framework: 
(2) Aliens who are members of the professions holding advanced degrees or aliens of 
exceptional ability. -
(A) In general. - Visas shall be made available ... to qualified immigrants who are 
members of the professions holding advanced degrees or their equivalent or 
who because of their exceptional ability in the sciences, arts, or business, will 
substantially benefit prospectively the national economy, cultural or 
educational interests, or welfare of the United States, and whose services in the 
sciences, arts, professions, or business are sought by an employer in the United 
States. 
(B) Waiver of job offer-
(i) National interest waiver. ... [T]he Attorney General may, when the Attorney 
General deems it to be in the national interest, waive the requirements of 
subparagraph (A) that an alien's services in the sciences, arts, professions, or 
business be sought by an employer in the United States. 
While neither the statute nor the pertinent regulations define the term "national interest," we set forth 
a framework for adjudicating national interest waiver petitions in the precedent decision Matter of 
Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. 884 (AAO 2016). 1 Dhanasar states that after a petitioner has established 
eligibility for EB-2 classification, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) may, as matter 
of discretion 2, grant a national interest waiver if the petitioner demonstrates: (1) that the foreign 
national's proposed endeavor has both substantial merit and national importance; (2) that the foreign 
national is well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor; and (3) 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. 
The first prong, substantial merit and national importance, focuses on the specific endeavor that the 
foreign national proposes to undertake. 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. 
The second prong shifts the focus from the proposed endeavor to the foreign national. To determine 
whether he or she is well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor, we consider factors including, 
but not limited to: the individual's education, skills, knowledge and record of success in related or 
similar efforts; a model or plan for future activities; any progress towards achieving the proposed 
endeavor; and the interest of potential customers, users, investors, or other relevant entities or 
individuals. 
The third prong requires the petitioner to demonstrate 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. In performing 
this analysis, USCIS may evaluate factors such as: whether, in light of the nature of the foreign 
national's qualifications or the proposed endeavor, it would be impractical either for the foreign 
1 In announcing this new framework, we vacated our prior precedent decision, Matter of New York State Department of 
Transportation, 22 I&N Dec. 215 (Act. Assoc. Comm'r 1998) (NYSDOT). 
2 See also Poursina v. USCIS, 936 F.3d 868, 2019 WL 4051593 (9th Cir. 2019) (finding USCIS' decision to grant or deny 
a national interest waiver to be discretionary in nature). 
2 
national to secure a job offer or for the petitioner to obtain a labor certification; whether, even assuming 
that other qualified U.S. workers are available, the United States would still benefit from the foreign 
national' s contributions; and whether the national interest in the foreign national' s contributions is 
sufficiently urgent to warrant forgoing the labor certification process. In each case, the factor(s) 
considered must, taken together, indicate 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. 3 
II. ANALYSIS 
The Director determined that the Petitioner qualifies as a member of the professions holding an advanced 
degree and we agree. We also conclude that the Petitioner has sufficiently described his proposed 
endeavor and that it has substantial merit. For the reasons discussed below, however, the Petitioner has 
not established the that he meets the national importance portion of the first prong under the Dhanasar 
analysis.4 
As an initial matter, we note that the Petitioner relies, in part, on his experience and his prior career 
accomplishments in Brazil to establish the national importance of his proposed endeavor. The 
Petitioner's expertise and record of success in previous positions are considerations under Dhanasar' s 
second prong, which "shifts the focus from the proposed endeavor to the foreign national." Id. at 
890. The issue here is whether the Petitioner has demonstrated the national importance of his proposed 
work. 
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. We further indicated 
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. 
Here, the Petitioner makes a number of general claims, such as his "proposed endeavor . . . will 
produce significant national benefits, due to the ripple effects of his professional activities" and "will 
also positively impact the United States' GDP, and thus, economy," but does not offer sufficient 
evidence to demonstrate that the prospective impact of his proposed endeavor rises to the level of 
national importance. For example, he has not demonstrated that the specific endeavor he proposes to 
undertake as a financial executive has significant potential to employ U.S. workers or otherwise offers 
substantial positive economic effects for our nation . Without evidence regarding any projected U.S. 
economic impact or job creation directly attributable to his future work, the record does not show that 
benefits to the regional or national economy resulting from the Petitioner's endeavor would reach the 
level of "substantial positive economic effects" contemplated by Dhanasar. Id. at 890. 
3 See Dhanasar , 26 I&N Dec. at 888-91, for elaboration on these three prongs. 
4 While we may not discuss each piece of evidence individually , we have reviewed and considered the record in its entirety. 
3 
The Petitioner also relies on industry reports and articles addressing a number of subjects, including 
the importance of a chief financial officer (CFO), the benefits of international investment and trade, 
and the effect of exchange rates on operating profits. However , as explained above, to evaluate whether 
the Petitioner satisfies the national importance requirement , we look to evidence documenting the 
"potential prospective impact" of his proposed endeavor, not the importance or economic benefits of 
his profession or industry. 
Although the record reflects that the Petitioner is a highly experienced financial executive who intends 
to provide valuable services for his employer(s) , he has not offered sufficient information and evidence 
to demonstrate that the prospective impact of his proposed endeavor rises to the level of national 
importance. 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. Id. at 893. 
Here, we similarly conclude that the record does not show that the Petitioner's role as a financial 
executive stands to sufficiently extend beyond his employer(s) to impact the industry more broadly at 
a level commensurate with national importance. Nor has he shown that the particular work he 
proposes to undertake offers original innovations that contribute to advancements in finance or 
otherwise has broader implications for his field. For all these reasons, 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 the remaining issues. 
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 
he has not established that he is eligible for, or otherwise merits, a national interest waiver as a matter 
of discretion. The appeal will 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