dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Finance

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: MARCH 12, 2025 In Re: 37188712 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, a financial manager, seeks employment-based second preference (EB-2) immigrant 
classification as an advanced degree professional, 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. § 1l 53(b )(2). 
The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the record did not 
establish 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 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 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 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. 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; 
• The individual is well-positioned to advance their proposed endeavor; and 
1 See Flores v. Garland, 72 F.4th 85, 88 (5th Cir. 2023) (joining the Third, Ninth, Eleventh, and D.C. Circuit Courts of 
Appeals in concluding that USCIS ' decision to grant or deny a national interest waiver is discretionary in nature). 
• On balance, waiving the job offer requirement would benefit the United States. 
Id. 
II. ANALYSIS 
The Director determined the Petitioner qualified for EB-2 classification as an advanced degree 
professional because he submitted evidence of his bachelor's degree in economic sciences and over 
five years of progressive experience in his specialty. We agree. The only issue on appeal is whether 
the Petitioner qualifies for a waiver of the job offer requirement in the national interest. 
In his Definitive Statement, the Petitioner describes his proposed endeavor as developing a private 
equity, hedge fund, and financial planning advice firm in Florida that will provide private equity 
capital, financial planning advice, business plan production, and financial assessment and consulting. 
A. Substantial Merit and National Importance 
The first Dhanasar prong, substantial merit and national importance, focuses on the specific endeavor 
that the individual proposes to undertake. Id. The endeavor's merit may be demonstrated in a range 
of areas such as business, entrepreneurialism, science, technology, culture, health, or education. Id. 
The Director determined the Petitioner's proposed endeavor has substantial merit. We agree. 
In determining whether the proposed endeavor has national importance, we consider its potential 
prospective impact. Id. This consideration may include whether the proposed endeavor has significant 
potential to employ U.S. workers (particularly in an economically depressed area), has other 
substantial positive economic effects, has national or even global implications within the field, or has 
other broader implications indicating national importance. Id. at 889-90. The Director determined the 
Petitioner did not establish that his proposed endeavor would extend beyond his company's clients to 
impact his field more broadly in a manner commensurate with national importance 
On appeal, the Petitioner asserts his company "has the potential to significantly contribute to the U.S. 
economy through job creation and economic impact." The Petitioner discusses the role of financial 
managers, but does not cite any evidence to support his claim. The Petitioner's business plan projects 
his company will employ 11 people the first year, increasing to 50 people in the fifth year. The record 
does not show that the employment of up to 50 people, even in an economically depressed area, is 
significantly high in the financial industry as the business plan states that in 2022 the industry 
generated 206,000 jobs. The Petitioner also claims his company will impact the national economy by 
offering economic convenience and agility, promoting growth and expansion and driving change with 
innovation, and stimulating the domestic job market. Again, the Petitioner does not cite any evidence 
to support this claim. The business plan projects net income for the company of $51,458 the first year, 
increasing to $1,160,170 in the fifth year, but does not indicate this income would have a substantial 
positive economic impact in an industry the business plan states is worth $57.2 billion dollars. 
On appeal, the Petitioner also asserts the Director did not give due regard to his recommendation 
letters. The Petitioner submitted letters from employers and colleagues. While they attest to the 
Petitioner's skills and experience, they do not establish the national importance of his proposed 
2 
endeavor. For example, M-C-F- praises the Petitioner's past work and describes him as "a unique 
professional who will only add value to the United States." A-L- commends the Petitioner's past work 
and attests to the Petitioner's "knowledge of finance, treasury, compliance, and corporate 
governance." F-B-M- praises the Petitioner's work at I Iand 
describes him as a "professional of intrinsic merit in the financial and real estate sectors." A-L-F­
praises the Petitioner for his "professionalism and high-level of expertise in real estate asset 
management, corporate governance, and financial controllership." Although they attest to the 
Petitioner's skills and accomplishments, M-C-F-, A-L-, F-B-M- and A-L-F- do not discuss his 
proposed endeavor. 
S-K-, A-K-, F-R-, and M-H- similarly praise the Petitioner's talents and past work, but do not discuss 
his proposed endeavor. J-S- states he is working with the Petitioner to develop an unspecified business 
platform, but does not indicate if the platform is part of the Petitioner's proposed endeavor. The 
Petitioner also submitted a letter from V-L-, Associate Professor of Marketing at I I 
I I expressing his opinion that the Petitioner qualifies for a national interest waiver. V-L-
discusses financial management services and the Brazilian economy and concludes that U.S. 
companies doing business in Latin America would benefit from the Petitioner's expertise and skills. 
V-L- does not discuss any specific aspects of the Petitioner's proposed endeavor that demonstrate its 
national importance. 
The Petitioner also claims the Director did not give due regard to industry reports and articles which 
demonstrate the national importance of his proposed endeavor. The Petitioner submitted articles and 
reports on the financial industry including financial management and managers, finance jobs, financial 
planning, management consulting, dynamic finance, digital disruption and the future of finance, chief 
economists outlook, budget and economic outlook for 2022 to 2032, 2022 trends for chief financial 
officers (CFOs), the financial services industry, top risks for financial institutions, immigrant 
entrepreneurs, documented dreamers, banks facing talent shortage, global shortage of skilled finance 
professionals, the global talent cnmch, financial and business services labor deficit, the finance 
workforce, and finance professionals offering powerful defense against cybersecurity threats. These 
articles and reports do not support the Petitioner's claim, as none of them discuss the Petitioner's 
proposed endeavor. Our assessment of national importance does not focus on the importance of a 
field or occupation in general, but instead "focuses on the specific endeavor that the foreign national 
proposes to undertake." Id. at 889. 
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, the 
Petitioner has not established that his proposed endeavor would sufficiently extend beyond his 
company's clients to impact his field more broadly at a level commensurate with national importance. 
Although the Petitioner's business plan indicates his company will provide private equity capital, 
financial planning advice, business plan production, and financial assessment and consulting, the 
record does not indicate that any of these services are unique, innovative or otherwise have national 
or even global implications in the financial industry. See id. ( discussing improved manufacturing 
processes or medical advances as examples of national or even global implications within a particular 
field). 
3 
In sum, the relevant evidence does not establish that the Petitioner's company has significant potential 
to employ U.S. workers (particularly in an economically depressed area), has other substantial positive 
economic effects, has national or even global implications within the field, or has other broader 
implications indicating national importance. Consequently, the Petitioner does not meet the first 
Dhanasar prong. 
B. The Remaining Dhanasar Prongs 
The Petitioner has not established the national importance of his specific proposed endeavor and he 
does not meet the first prong of the Dhanasar framework. As this issue is dispositive of the 
Petitioner's appeal, we decline to reach and hereby reserve determination of his eligibility under the 
second and third prongs of the Dhanasar framework. See INS v. Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. 24, 25 (1976) 
( stating that "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 
The 
Petitioner has not established the national importance of his proposed endeavor and does not meet 
the first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework. Consequently, he has not demonstrated that he 
is eligible for or merits a waiver of the job offer requirement in the national interest as a matter of 
discretion. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
4