dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Finance

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: JUL. 16, 2024 In Re: 31840241 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, a financial analyst, 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 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 had not 
established that eligibility for 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 pursuant to 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 qualify for the underlying EB-2 visa classification
, a petitioner must establish they are an advanced 
degree professional or an individual of exceptional ability in the sciences, arts, or business. Section 
203(b )(2)(A) of the Act. 
If a petitioner establishes eligibility for the underlying EB-2 classification, they must then demonstrate 
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 of Dhanasar, 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; 
• The individual is well-positioned to advance their proposed endeavor; and 
• On balance, waiving the job offer requirement would benefit the United States. 
Id. 
II. ANALYSIS 
The first prong of the Dhanasar analysis, substantial merit and national importance, focuses on the 
specific endeavor that the individual 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. Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. As it relates to substantial 
merit, the endeavor's merit may be shown in a range of areas such as business, entrepreneurialism, 
science, technology, culture, health, or education. Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. 
The Director determined, and we agree, that the Petitioner established the substantial merit, but not 
the national importance, of the proposed endeavor. 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 specific endeavor that the foreign national proposes to undertake." See Dhanasar, 
26 I&N Dec. at 889. 
The Petitioner proposes to create! Ia financial consultancy company in Florida that will provide 
a comprehensive suite of services to businesses including, "refining their financial documentation, 
enhancing their tracking systems, and bolstering their overall fiscal stability, thereby easing their path 
to securing business loans from financial institutions." The financial assistance she proposes to 
provide is "expressly designed for small to medium-sized enterprises within the United States." 
Regarding the Petitioner's proposed endeavor, the record does not include detailed and thorough plans 
to reach beyond her company to make a national impact. On appeal the Petitioner submitted additional 
articles such as "How Financial Planning and Analysis Drive Business Agility and Performance" and 
"Bonds with Benefits: Impact Investing in Corporate Debt" to establish the national importance of her 
proposed endeavor. Although these articles demonstrate the national importance of financial analytics 
and consultants, the matter here is not whether financial analytics and consultants are nationally 
important. Rather, the Petitioner must demonstrate the national importance of her specific endeavor 
that aims to provide financial analysis and automated systems management. The business plan 
included in response to the Director's request for additional evidence (RFE) indicates the Petitioner 
will, "be dedicated to providing consulting services to various entities that operate in the United States 
financial market and [will] help them make better decisions in monitoring, detecting, countering, and 
1 See Flores v. Garland, 72 F.4th 85, 88 (5th Cir. 2023) (joining the Ninth, Eleventh, Third and D.C. Circuit Courts in 
concluding that USCIS' decision to grant or deny a national interest waiver is discretionary in nature). 
2 
preventing misconduct practices to decrease their reputation risk and regulatory risk and enhance 
business performance, thereby generating revenues within the country and creating employment 
opportunities." But she does not provide further explanation as to how this process will occur. 
Generalized conclusory statements that do not identify a specific impact in the field have little 
probative value. See 1756, Inc. v. US. Att'y Gen., 745 F. Supp. 9, 15 (D.D.C. 1990) (holding that an 
agency need not credit conclusory assertions in immigration benefits adjudications). Here the record 
lacks specific, detailed plans to provide financial services on a national level. 
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. Dhanasar at 893. Here 
too, while we agree with the Petitioner that financial analysis plays an important role in shaping and 
influencing the economic landscape, the record does not show how her proposed endeavor stands to 
sufficiently extend beyond her own company to lead to "national or even global implications" that will 
shape the economy more broadly at a level commensurate with national importance. Id. at 889. 
Likewise, we recognize that the Petitioner's endeavor of providing financial services to small and 
medium sized businesses could improve their fiscal outcome, but the Petitioner does not establish how 
the prospective impact of her company would have a broader impact consistent with national 
importance. 
Moreover, the Petitioner stresses her "profound knowledge of the banking sector, with specialized 
insights into finance, automated systems, and operations management." But, the Petitioner's 
knowledge, skills, and abilities 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 she proposes to undertake has national importance under Dhanasar 's first 
prong. She also contends that according to the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics there is a 9% 
projected employment growth in the financial analyst industry and that this growing need for analysts 
amplifies the national significance of the proposed endeavor. However, growth of the industry and 
financial analyst occupations does not render her proposed endeavor nationally important under the 
Dhanasar framework. In fact, the demand for qualified workers is directly addressed by the U.S. 
Department of Labor through the labor certification process. 
The Petitioner presented an evaluation from Dr. I I DBA, CPA with ___ 
who found the Petitioner's initial proposed endeavor has national importance. 
The letter discusses the importance of the Petitioner's financial services consultancy that proposes "to 
bridge the gap between financial institutions and small and medium-sized businesses," but does not 
explain, other than generalized statements, how the Petitioner's particular services would have broader 
implications for our country. Similarly, the Petitioner's submission ofletters from businesses seeking 
financial services relate to the influence her company would have on those specific clients and 
companies, not the far reaching or national impact of her company. 
Finally, while she provided a business plan for the proposed company, the Petitioner did not present 
any supporting evidence, corroborating the assertions and figures. Moreover, the Petitioner did not 
demonstrate how her business plan's claimed revenue and employment projections, even if credible 
or plausible, have significant potential to employ U.S. workers or otherwise offers substantial positive 
economic effects for our nation. Although the business plan forecasts sales of $807K in year 5, the 
Petitioner did not establish the significance of this data to show that the benefits to the regional or 
3 
national economy would reach the level of "substantial positive economic effects" contemplated by 
Dhanasar. Id. at 890. Similarly, even though the business plan claims the creation of 5-12 positions 
in year 5, the Petitioner did not demonstrate the relevance of these numbers and show that such future 
staffing levels would provide substantial economic benefits to Florida or the U.S. economy more 
broadly at a level commensurate with national importance. The Petitioner, for instance, did not 
establish that such employment figures would utilize a significant population of workers in the area or 
would substantially impact job creation and economic growth, either regionally or nationally. For all 
these reasons, the record does not demonstrate that, beyond the limited benefits provided to its 
prospective clients and employees, the Petitioner's proposed endeavor has broader implications rising 
to the level of having national importance or that it would offer substantial positive economic effects. 
Because the documentation in the record does not establish the national importance of the proposed 
endeavor as required by the first prong of the Dhanasar precedent decision, the Petitioner has not 
demonstrated eligibility for a national interest waiver. Further analysis ofthe Petitioner's eligibility under 
the second and third prongs outlined in Dhanasar, therefore, would serve no meaningful purpose, as well 
as a review of the Petitioner's qualification for the underlying immigrant classification. 2 
III. CONCLUSION 
As the Petitioner has not met the 
requisite first prong ofthe Dhanasar analytical framework, we conclude 
the Petitioner has not demonstrated eligibility 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. 
2 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 alternate issues on appeal where applicants do not otherwise meet their burden of proof). 
4