dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Finance

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: AUG. 18, 2023 In Re: 28398334 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, a credit analyst, 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 that is attached to this 
EB-2 immigrant 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. 
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, 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. 
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) . 
Although the Director did not make a finding in the decision as to whether the Petitioner qualifies for 
the underlying EB-2 immigrant classification, the Director did state in a request for the evidence (RFE) 
that the Petitioner qualifies as an advanced degree professional. 2 The Director concluded that the 
Petitioner did not, however, establish any of the three required prongs of the Dhanasar analytical 
framework. The Petitioner proposes to establish a mortgage lending company,.__ _______ ___. 
in the state of Florida to provide mortgage loans to "American and international clients looking 
forward to developing optimal loan solutions." 
In analyzing the first prong of the Dhanasar framework, the Director found that the Petitioner 
established the substantial merit of the proposed endeavor but not its national importance. The 
Director concluded that although the Petitioner's business plan states that the company will hire 21 
full-time employees, the record does not establish the business need for this number of workers, nor 
that the creation of this number of jobs would have a substantial positive economic effect that would 
rise to the level of national importance. The Director also concluded that the record does not establish 
that the proposed endeavor would impact the mortgage lending industry more broadly. Finally, the 
Director concluded that the industry reports in record regarding foreign entrepreneurs and their 
positive economic impact did not establish the proposed endeavor's national importance. 
On appeal, the Petitioner asserts generally that the Director improperly imposed a higher standard of 
proof than a preponderance of the evidence and did not give due regard to the evidence in the record, 
including the Petitioner's statement, business plan, and industry reports and articles. However, the 
Petitioner does not support these assertions with specificity as to the record or how the Director 
imposed a higher standard. The Petitioner's unsupported assertions alone are not sufficient to establish 
error in the Director's decision nor meet her burden of proof to demonstrate eligibility for a national 
interest waiver. 
As to the national importance of the proposed endeavor specifically, the Petitioner primarily discusses 
on appeal her educational background and employment experience as establishing the national 
importance requirement. However, evidence of the Petitioner's education, skills, and expertise, 
including work experience, generally relates to the second prong of the Dhanasar framework, which 
"shifts the focus from the proposed endeavor to the [noncitizen]" and whether she is well-positioned 
to advance it. Matter of Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 890. The issue here is whether the Petitioner's 
specific proposed endeavor-to establish a mortgage lending company-has national importance 
under Matter of Dhanasar's first prong. The evidence of the Petitioner's work experience does not 
elaborate on the Petitioner's specific proposed endeavor nor support its national importance. 
The Petitioner next disputes the Director's finding that the Petitioner did not establish the business 
need for the number of employees projected in the business plan. The Petitioner states that the need 
for these employees "will arise as the business expands" and that "various positions such as real estate 
manager, real estate agents, brokers, telemarketers, compliance officers, receptionists will have to be 
filled up to ensure the success of the business." Although the Petitioner asserts that the business plan 
supports this need, she does not provide further clarification as to how this number is justified by the 
2 The record shows the Petitioner obtained the foreign equivalent of bachelor of business administration degree and 
possesses at least five years of progressive post-baccalaureate experience in business management and finance. 
2 
business plan. Moreover, we agree with the Director that the Petitioner has not established that the 
creation of 21 jobs in five years would result in the type of"substantial positive economic effects" that 
would rise to the level of national importance. Matter ofDhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 890. 
Finally, the Petitioner asserts on appeal that the language ofMatter ofDhanasar allows for a regionally 
focused endeavor to nevertheless establish national importance, and that we should "avoid 
overemphasis on the geographic breadth" of the proposed endeavor. The Petitioner is correct that the 
analytical framework introduced in Matter ofDhanasar sought to reduce the focus on the geographic 
impact of an endeavor. See id. at 887. However, the Petitioner does not claim that the Director made 
any specific legal or factual errors related to the regional nature of the Petitioner's proposed mortgage 
lending company. The Director did not rely on lack of geographic breadth in concluding that it lacks 
national importance. Rather, the Director concluded that the Petitioner did not offer sufficient 
information and evidence to establish that the proposed endeavor would have broader implications for 
the mortgage lending industry or that it would offer substantial positive economic effects. Upon de 
novo review, we agree. Although an endeavor that is regionally focused may have national 
importance, it must still have a broad impact. Id. at 889. 
The Petitioner's appeal brief includes many broad claims about the potential impact of the proposed 
endeavor, including that it will "help the U.S. stay competitive by bringing competitive services, 
helping develop the country, and producing income for the U.S. economy," or "will be able to affect 
the entire mortgage market in the United States by proving [sic] a range of financial services .... " 
These claims are not supported by the evidence in the record. Although the record reflects the 
Petitioner's hope to establish a small mortgage lending company in Florida, the Petitioner has not 
demonstrated that the potential prospective impact of this endeavor rises to the level of national 
importance. 
The Petitioner has not established that the proposed endeavor has national importance, as required by 
the first Dhanasar prong; therefore, she is not eligible for a national interest waiver. We acknowledge 
the Petitioner's arguments on appeal as to the second and third prongs of Dhanasar but, having found 
that the evidence does not establish the Petitioner's eligibility as to national importance, we reserve 
our opinion regarding whether the record establishes the remaining Dhanasar prongs. See INS v. 
Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. at 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 alternative issues on appeal where the 
applicant is otherwise ineligible). Because the Petitioner has not met the national importance 
requirement of the first prong of Dhanasar, we 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. 
3