dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Finance

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 22645344 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: OCT. 13, 2022 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker (Advanced Degree, Exceptional Ability, National 
Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, a financial manager, seeks second preference immigrant classification as either an 
advanced degree professional or an individual of exceptional ability in the sciences, arts or business, 
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). After a 
petitioner has established eligibility for EB-2 classification, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration 
Services (USCIS) may, as matter of discretion, 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. Matter of Dhanasar, 26 l&N Dec. 884 (AAO 2016). 
The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the petition, concluding that although the Petitioner 
established the substantial merit and national importance of the proposed endeavor, he had not 
established eligibility under the remaining Dhanasar prongs. Therefore, the Director determined that 
the Petitioner had not established eligibility for a national interest waiver. On appeal, the Petitioner 
reasserts his eligibility for a national interest waiver and claims the Director erred in denying the 
petition. 
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 Skirball Cultural Ctr., 25 l&N Dec. 799, 
806 (AAO 2012). Upon de nova review, we will dismiss the appeal. 
I. LEGAL FRAMEWORK 
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. 
Section 10l{a)(32) of the Act, 8 USC § 1101(a)(32), provides that "[t]he term 'profession' shall 
include but not be limited to architects, engineers, lawyers, physicians, surgeons, and teachers in 
elementary or secondary schools, colleges, academics, or seminaries." 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2) contains the following relevant definitions: 
Advanced degree means any United States academic or professional degree or a foreign 
equivalent degree above that of baccalaureate. A United States baccalaureate degree 
or a foreign equivalent degree followed by at least five years of progressive experience 
in the specialty shall be considered the equivalent of a master's degree. If a doctoral 
degree is customarily required by the specialty, the alien must have a United States 
doctorate or a foreign equivalent degree. 
Exceptional ability in the sciences, arts, or business means a degree of expertise 
significantly above that ordinarily encountered in the sciences, arts, or business. 
Profession means one of the occupations listed in section 101(a)(32) of the Act, as well 
as any occupation for which a United States baccalaureate degree or its foreign 
equivalent is the minimum requirement for entry in the occupation. 
In addition, the regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(ii) sets forth the specific evidentiary requirements 
for demonstrating eligibility as an individual of exceptional ability. A petitioner must submit 
documentation that satisfies at least three of the six categories of evidence listed at 8 C.F.R. 
§ 204.5(k)(3)(i i). 
2 
Furthermore, 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 l&N Dec. 884 (AAO 2016). In announcing this new framework, we vacated 
our prior precedent decision, Matter of New York State Department of Transportation, 22 l&N Dec. 
215 (Act. Assoc. Comm'r 1998). Dhanasar states that after a petitioner has established eligibility for 
EB-2 classification, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) may grant a national interest 
waiver as matter of discretion. 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). As a matter of discretion, the national interest waiver may be granted 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. See Dhanasar, 26 l&N Dec. at 888-91, for elaboration on these three 
prongs. 
II. ANALYSIS 
A. The EB-2 Classification 
The Director did not provide any analysis or specific finding concerning the Petitioner's eligibility for the 
underlying EB-2 classification. Upon our de nova review of the record, we conclude that the Petitioner 
has not established he is a member of the professions holding an advanced degree or that he is an 
individual of exceptional ability. 
1. Member of the Professions Holding an Advanced Degree 
In order to show that a petitioner holds a qualifying advanced degree, the petition must be accompanied 
by "[a]n official academic record showing that the [individual] has a United States advanced degree 
or a foreign equivalent degree." 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(i)(A). Alternatively, a petitioner may present 
"[a]n official academic record showing that the [individual] has a United States baccalaureate degree 
or a foreign equivalent degree, and evidence in the form of letters from current or former employer(s) 
showing that the [individual] has at least five years of progressive post-baccalaureate experience in 
the specialty." 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(i)(B). 
The Petitioner provided documentation to support a finding that he earned a foreign "titulo de 
bacharel" in accounting sciences in 1999. To support a finding that he qualifies as an advanced degree 
rofessional the Petitioner provided an academic and experience evaluation from senior evaluator 
on behalf ofl I an academic credential evaluation service provider. AlthoughlJ 
_ stated that the courses completed and the number of credit hours earned indicate the U.S. 
equivalency of his education, he offered little explanation of the Petitioner's courses and credit hours, nor 
did he analyze how they are the equivalent of a U.S. education. As such,I I generalized 
conclusions are insufficient to establish the U.S. equivalency of the Petitioner's education. In addition, 
I !stated that the Petitioner earned his degree in accounting sciences in 1998, which appears to 
be inaccurate, based upon the employment documents in the record. We may, in our discretion, use an 
evaluation of a person's foreign education as an advismy opinion. Matter of Sea, Inc., 19 l&N Dec. 817, 
820 (Comm'r 1988). However, where an opinion is not in accord with other information or is in any way 
3 
questionable, we may discount or give less weight to that evaluation. Id. Here, we question the accuracy 
of I conclusions, as he did not provide sufficient analysis to support them. Accordingly, we 
conclude that this evaluation is of little probative value in this matter. 
According to the AACRAO EDGE database, a "titulo de bacharel" is comparable to a U.S. bachelor's 
degree. The AACRAO EDGE database is a reliable resource concerning the U.S. equivalencies of 
foreign education. See generally American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions 
Officers, Electronic Database for Global Education, https://www.aacrao.org/edge (last visited Oct. 13, 
2022). Therefore, we conclude that the Petitioner possesses the foreign equivalent of a U.S. bachelor's 
degree. However, the record does not establish that the Petitioner pursued any formal education 
beyond this degree. Thus, to qualify as an advanced degree professional with only a bachelor's degree 
education, the Petitioner must establish that he possessed at least five years of progressive post­
baccalaureate experience in the specialty by the filing date of his Form 1-140 petition. 
The Petitioner provided numerous letters that list the titles of his employment positions; however, the 
letters do not include a sufficient explanation of the Petitioner's duties in the positions such that the 
progressive nature of the Petitioner's experience can be established. Additionally, none of the letters 
indicate whether the Petitioner worked full-time or part-time. Finally, some of the dates in the letters 
conflict with the dates the Petitioner provided in his resume, while others do not include either 
definitive employment start dates or end dates. 
To illustrate, one letter states that the superintendent of the Port ofO"exonerate[d]" the Petitioner 
of his appointment as a financial administrative director on December 23, 2014. This letter does not 
provide a start date for the employment, a discussion of the Petitioner's work in the position, or any 
indication as to whether the work the Petitioner performed was full-time or part-time basis. Other 
letters indicate that local government authorities appointed the Petitioner to temporary positions of 
varying durations ranging from a few weeks up to almost two years. For instance, one letter stated 
that the Mayor of the City of Dappointed the Petitioner to work as the superintendent of the Port 
of from January 20, 2014, to February 8, 2014, while the permanent employee occupying this 
position went on vacation. The Petitioner provided similar letters to evidence temporary appointments 
occurring in 2007, 2008, 2010, 2011, 2012, and 2014. However, some of the letters include a start 
date without an end date or an end date without a start date. Furthermore, one of the letters contains 
a signature dated April 31, 2010, a date which does not exist. Based upon the information the 
Petitioner provided in his resume, we note that he worked as city councilor and secretary of the finance 
department from July 2007 to June 2008; however, the employment letters provided do not support 
this claim, both in terms of the exact title of his position and the dates in which he worked. Without 
further clarification, we question the credibility and accuracy of the Petitioner's employment claims. 
The Petitioner must resolve these inconsistencies with independent, objective evidence pointing to 
where the truth lies. Matter of Ho, 19 l&N Dec. 582, 591-92 (BIA 1988). Unresolved material 
inconsistencies may lead us to reevaluate the reliability and sufficiency of other evidence submitted 
in support of the requested immigration benefit. Id. 
The Petitioner also stated in his resume that he founded an accounting services business in 1994 and 
currently remains a partner in that business. Although we note that the Petitioner registered his 
company in Brazil, he provided little evidence to support a finding that he actually provided accounting 
services. For instance, the Petitioner has not provided evidence of how many clients he has served 
4 
and whether they are individuals or businesses. Further, the record does not include corroborating 
details, such as the names and employment records of the "ten highly-qualified accounting 
professionals" who work in his business, nor does it include evidence of specific services rendered, 
such as contracts, invoices, or payments. Accordingly, we cannot conclude that the Petitioner has 
sufficiently established that he gained accounting experience as a self-employed business owner. 
Moreover, as the Petitioner founded the accounting services business before he earned a foreign 
equivalent of a U.S. bachelor's degree, it is not apparent how this experience, even if progressive, 
could be considered post-baccalaureate. 
For the foregoing reasons, the Petitioner has not established that he has at least five years of 
progressive post-baccalaureate experience in financial management. Therefore, the Petitioner has not 
established that he is a member of the professions holding an advanced degree. 
2. Evidentiary Criteria for Exceptional Abi I ity 
As the Petitioner has not established that he qualifies as an advanced degree professional, we provide 
additional analysis of his eligibility as an individual with exceptional ability. However, for the reasons 
explained below, we conclude that the record does not establish that the Petitioner is an individual of 
exceptional ability. 
An official academic record showing that the alien has a degree, diploma, certificate, 
or similar award from a college, university, school, or other institution of learning 
relating to the area of exceptional ability. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(ii)(A) 
The Petitioner provided evidence that he completed a "titulo de bacharel" in accounting sciences in 
1999. Therefore, the record establishes that the Petitioner has met this criterion. 
Evidence in the form of letter(s) from current or former employer(s) showing that the alien 
has at least ten years of full-time experience in the occupation for which he or she is being 
sought. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(ii)(B) 
For the same reasons explained in the prior section concerning eligibility as a member of the professions 
holding an advanced degree, we conclude that the evidence of the Petitioner's employment is inconsistent, 
lacks sufficient detail, and is not adequately corroborated by other evidence in the record. Accordingly, 
the Petitioner has not established that he meets this criterion. 
A license to practice the profession or certification for a particular profession or 
occupation. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(ii)(C) 
Under this criterion, the Petitioner submitted evidence of an accountant identity card, license of 
accounting organization, registration certificate, and professional regularity certificate from the 
Accountancy Regional Council of the State ofl I (council). The identity card itself does not 
indicate what qualified the Petitioner to obtain such a card, nor does it indicate what the card confers upon 
him. By itself, the identity card does not support a finding that it is a license to practice the profession, 
but merely identifies the Petitioner as an accountant. The accounting organization license appears to 
have been issued in 1996, prior to the Petitioner's completion of his accounting sciences degree in 
5 
1999. Therefore, the Petitioner received this document prior to completing his accounting degree, and 
as such, it cannot be considered a license to practice the profession. 
The accompanying registration certificate states that the Petitioner is "enabled to exercise and to [sic] 
professional professional prerogatives conferred." However, both the registration certificate and the 
professional regularity certificate documents appear to have been issued in December 2018, after the 
Petitioner gained his claimed experience as a financial manager. This suggests the Petitioner did not need 
to obtain these certificates as prerequisites to work as an accountant or financial manager. Therefore, it 
cannot be concluded that they represent a license or certification to practice the profession. Additionally, 
both documents' validity expired in March 2019, prior to the filing of the petition in April 2019. 
Accordingly, it cannot be concluded that these documents were valid at the time of filing. The Petitioner 
must establish eligibility at the time of filing for the requested benefit and must continue to be eligible 
for the benefit through the adjudication of it. 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(1). Similarly, we conclude that for 
the certificates to serve as evidence of eligibility under this criterion, they must have been valid at the 
time of filing and continue to remain valid through the adjudication of the petition. 
Based on the evidence provided, we conclude that the Petitioner has not established eligibility under 
this criterion. 
Evidence that the alien has commanded a salary, or other remuneration for services, 
which demonstrates exceptional ability. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(ii)(D) 
The Petitioner submitted Brazilian income tax documentation in order to evidence that he has 
sufficient personal finances to fund his proposed endeavor. However, the Petitioner did not provide 
evidence that he has commanded a salary, or other remuneration for services, which demonstrates 
exceptional ability. For the foregoing reasons, the Petitioner has not established eligibility under this 
criterion. 
Evidence of membership in professional associations. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(ii)(E) 
The Petitioner submitted a university resolution document which states that the president of the university 
designated the Petitioner as a full member of the "curator council" from February 2007 to September 
2008. Additionally, the Petitioner provided a participation registration document that suggests the 
municipality designated him as a trustee in the higher education council of a local university from 
February 2007 to September 2008. The record does not include sufficient evidence of what professional 
qualifications, if any, enabled the Petitioner to obtain such designations, nor does it indicate what the 
designations conferred upon him. Notably, the documentation provided does not indicate that the 
designations related in any way to the profession of accounting or financial management. Even if these 
designations could be considered memberships in a professional association, they appear to have expired 
in 2008, and therefore would not be considered current memberships. 
Lastly, the Petitioner submitted a November 2018 statement from the Union of Accountants of 
indicating that the Petitioner has been an associate since March 2008. We cannot determine from the 
documentation provided what being an "associate" in the union entails. Even if we assume that 
"associate" is synonymous with membership in an accounting union, it still would not be apparent what 
6 
qualified the Petitioner to become a member such that the professional nature of the association can be 
established. 
For the foregoing reasons, the evidence does not support a finding that the Petitioner has met this criterion. 
Evidence of recognition for achievements and significant contributions to the industry 
or field by peers, governmental entities, or professional or business organizations. 
8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(ii)(F) 
The evidence is insufficient to demonstrate that the Petitioner has been recognized by peers, government 
entities, or professional or business organizations for achievements and significant contributions to the 
industry or field as a whole. 
The Petitioner submitted reference letters from former colleagues. The authors of the letters commend 
the Petitioner's work and praise his personal and professional qualities. However, they do not provide 
specific detai Is that explain how the Petitioner's work is representative of recognition for achievements 
and sjanjfjcant contributions to the industry or field of financial management. For instance,! I I an administrative superintendent ofl I stated that, as chief financial officer 
at the Port of the Petitioner developed a financial management model during a time in which a large 
flood occurred in the region. I ]stated that the Petitioner "established a strategy that allowed the 
gradual resumption of activities and the maintenance of economic and financial stability despite the severe 
restrictions imposed by the climatic event. Due to his essential contributions, it was possible to resume 
the allocation of resources, the austerity in management and the methodology of monitoring and 
reporting." HoweverJ ldid not provide details regarding how the financial management model 
worked, what it involved, or how the Petitioner developed it. Moreover,! ldid not explain what 
the Petitioner's strategy involved or how it functioned to allow the port to gradually resume activities and 
maintain economic and financial stability.1 Additionally, the Petitioner has not submitted sufficient 
independent and objective evidence to corroborate the claims made in the letter. Even if he had, this 
would not explain how helping the port to resume activities and maintain economic and financial stability 
constitutes an achievement or contribution to the field of financial management, as opposed to a 
contribution to the Port of Likewise.I I the former secretary of 
tourism for the Port otD'ricited in his letter that when the Petitioner served as chairman of boat races 
in the port, the Petitioner earned revenue and created jobs for the city. However, the author does not 
explain how this demonstrates that the Petitioner has received recognition for achievements and 
significant contributions in the financial management field or industry.2 Rather, it suggests that the 
Petitioner may have contributed to the city through tourism and fundraising. 
We also reviewed the evidence that indicates the Petitioner created the first sailing team in the city, in 
addition to the evidence that he worked to fund and host regatta races in ltajai. Further, we acknowledge 
that during the Petitioner's service as interim head of the port, the Port ofltajai received the "Social Seal 
1 We note that the author of this letter pledges support for the permanent residence of _____ As such, it 
appears this letter may have been written for a different etitioner. 
2 The Petitioner provided a letter from a freelance civil engineer. We note that both 
________ and the Petitioner share the name, I I which 
suggests a familial relationship. Without further explanation, we question whether these letters are from independent and 
objective sources. 
7 
2009 - 2010 Certification" from the city hall, a business association, and the commission on non­
governmental entities. The Petitioner explained that the Port of I certification provided a reminder 
of the importance of contributing to a more equitable society and a better quality of life. While we 
acknowledge these accomplishments, the Petitioner has not explained how any of them relate to or affect 
the field of financial management. Overall, the evidence suggests the Petitioner has experience in sailing, 
boat races, tourism, and local government, but the evidence does not support a finding that the Petitioner 
received recognition for achievements and significant contributions to the industry or field of financial 
management. 
Therefore, we conclude that the Petitioner has not established eligibility under this criterion. 
Summary of Exceptional Ability Determination 
The record does not support a finding that the Petitioner met at least three of the six regulatory criteria for 
exceptional ability at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(ii). Rather, we conclude that the evidence supports a finding 
of eligibility under only one criterion. Therefore, the Petitioner has not established his eligibility as an 
individual of exceptional ability under section 203(b)(2)(A) of the Act. As the Petitioner has satisfied 
only one of the criteria, a final merits determination is not required. 
3. Conclusion 
The Petitioner bears the responsibility of ensuring that the record demonstrates how he qualifies for 
the immigration benefit sought. Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361. Additionally, the Petitioner 
must support his assertions with relevant, probative, and credible evidence. See Matter of Chawathe, 
25 l&N Dec. 369, 376 (AAO 2010). As explained, the Petitioner has not demonstrated that he qualifies 
as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree or as an individual of exceptional ability 
under section 203(b)(2)(A) of the Act. Therefore, he is not eligible for a national interest waiver. 
B. The Proposed Endeavor 
The Petitioner has not established that he qualifies for the underlying EB-2 classification. As this is a 
prerequisite to qualifying for a national interest waiver, we need not address the Petitioner's eligibility 
under the Dhanasar framework. However, because the Director evaluated the Petitioner's eligibility 
under Dhanasar and the Petitioner claims error in the Director's decision, we provide additional 
analysis of the proposed endeavor. 
The Petitioner stated on his Form 1-140 that his proposed endeavor is to work as a financial manager, 
which involves planning, directing, or coordinating in the areas of accounting, investing, banking, 
insurance, and securities. In the petition letter he submitted with his initial filing, the Petitioner proposed 
to "continue my career as a Financial Manager specialized in the fields of Finance, Accounting, and 
Seaport Administration in the United States, joining large U.S. corporations that have global business and 
international presence." In his professional plan and statement, the Petitioner stated that he plans to pursue 
positions and projects with multinational companies in the United States. He indicated that many U.S. 
companies doing business or planning to do business in Brazil could benefit from his expertise. In 
support, the Petitioner provided a list of open positions in the United States for which he believes he 
qualifies. 
8 
The Director issued a request for evidence (RFE), notifying the Petitioner that, among other deficiencies, 
the record did not establish the national importance of the proposed endeavor. In his RFE response, the 
Petitioner stated that he plans to continue his career in financial management, Brazilian accounting, and 
investment consulting. He intends to "leverage the U.S. business community and local, regional, and 
international business networks to reach potential clients." Further, he will conduct business with major 
U.S. companies to provide accounting advice, financial and tax management, and investment incentives. 
He also explained that he created his own company, I I a Florida-based provider of 
accounting and financial services, in which he mana es all business activities. He stated that he will serve 
as the chief executive officer CEO of and that his proposed endeavor is to continue his 
business in Florida. Through, ____ the Petitioner intends to attract foreign investors, develop 
financial strategies and operation plans for clients, make budgetary forecasts and decisions, acquire funds, 
and provide auditing services. He also stated that by understanding clients' needs and assessing their 
overall financial picture, will guide clients through profitable and secure accounting 
decisions. In addition, he plans to advise investors on the real estate market and promote the development 
of areas in need of revitalization. His proposed endeavor also involves training other workers, helping 
Brazilian and American clients comply with financial and tax regulations, and becoming a leading 
consultant to investors seeking to open a business in the United States. 
The Petitioner heavily emphasized his intention to cultivate Brazilian clients that are interested in U.S. 
real estate investments. In addition, we understand that the Petitioner proposes to offer services in various 
categories including: 
• Investment Advice: investment management analysis, portfolio development, private equity 
consulting, and performance monitoring; 
• Financial Management: offer services to businesses in Florida and Delaware, including financial 
management, accounting, tax preparation, payroll, and human resources consulting; and 
• Training Other Professionals in the Finance Industry: train peers in sophisticated projects in 
financial management and investment methodologies, disseminate the Petitioner's knowledge to 
laypersons so that they may understand the market, and teach other professionals in order to 
enhance their skills, experiences, and careers. 
In Dhanasar, we held that a petitioner must identify "the specific endeavor that the foreign national 
proposes to undertake." See Dhanasar, 26 l&N Dec. at 889. Based upon the proposed endeavor as 
initially described and the details the Petitioner provided in his RFE response, we conclude that the 
Petitioner has not identified a specific or consistent proposed endeavor. In addition, the Petitioner's RFE 
response materially changed his proposed endeavor from that which he described in his initial filing. 
The purpose of the RFE is to elicit further information that clarifies whether eligibility for the benefit 
sought has been established. 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(8). When responding to an RFE, the Petitioner cannot 
materially change the proposed endeavor. USCIS regulations affirmatively require a petitioner to 
establish eligibility for the benefit sought at the time the petition is filed. See 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b){l). A 
visa petition may not be approved based on speculation of future eligibility or after a petitioner becomes 
eligible under a new set of facts. See Matter of Michelin Tire Corp., 17 I&N Dec. 248, 249 (Reg'l 
Comm'r 1978). A petitioner may not make material changes to a petition in an effort to make a deficient 
9 
petition conform to USCIS requirements. See Matter of lzummi, 22 l&N Dec. 169, 176 (Assoc. Comm'r 
1998). If significant changes are made to the initial request for approval, the Petitioner must file a new 
petition, rather than seek approval of a petition that is not supported by the facts in the record. 
In the initial filing, the Petitioner emphasized that he would continue his career as a financial manager 
specialized in the fields of finance, accounting, and seaport administration in the United States. He 
proposed to join large U.S. corporations that have global business and international presence. Further, 
the Petitioner planned to pursue positions and projects with multinational companies in the United States 
and emphasized working with companies that conduct business or plan to conduct business in Brazil. In 
his initial filing, the Petitioner did not mention entrepreneurship or U.S. business ownership as a feature 
of his proposed endeavor. 
By contrast, in his RFE response, he described his proposed endeavor as working as the CEO of his own 
company, which involves providing customers tailored financial and accounting solutions, attracting 
foreign investments, and contributing to the increase of real estate investments in the United States. He 
emphasized cultivating Brazilian clients interested in U.S. real estate, rather than U.S. clients interested 
in conducting business in Brazil. Although the Petitioner's activities may loosely relate to each other 
through some level of involvement in financial management, the focus of the work is quite different. It 
is not apparent how the Petitioner will simultaneously run his own financial and investment management 
company in Florida; provide customers financial and investment services; attract and advise foreign 
investors in U.S. real estate; teach and train other professionals; and join large U.S. corporations or 
multinational companies that have global business and international presence. Accordingly, the Petitioner 
has not provided a specific or consistent proposed endeavor activity such that we can determine its 
substantial merit and national importance. 
In addition, the record indicates that the Petitioner currently works as a managing director of 
I I helping homeowners and guests to negotiate rents and providing specialized assistance 
to owners in managing their homes. The Petitioner's resume also indicates that he continues to work as 
the founder and partner of his accounting services business in Brazil, while other documents in the record 
suggest that he also serves as the sailing team's manager and captain. The Petitioner has not 
provided sufficient information to establish how much time he will devote to his numerous proposed 
activities, while also working at,__ ______ and continuing his activities abroad. Notably, 
these other activities do not appear to relate to financial management. As such, the Petitioner's 
continuation of them reinforces the conclusion that the Petitioner has not provided a specific or consistent 
proposed endeavor activity. 
In determining whether an individual qualifies for a national interest waiver, we must rely on the specific 
proposed endeavor to determine whether (1) it has both substantial merit and national importance and (2) 
the foreign national is well positioned to advance it under the Dhanasar analysis. Because the Petitioner 
has not provided consistent information regarding his proposed endeavor, we cannot conclude that he 
meets either the first or second prong, or that he has established eligibility for a national interest waiver. 
Ill. CONCLUSION 
The documentation in the record does not establish the Petitioner's eligibility for the underlying 
classification, nor does it identify a specific and consistent proposed endeavor. Therefore, the 
10 
Petitioner has not demonstrated eligibility for a national interest waiver. Further analysis of his 
eligibility under the remaining prongs outlined in Dhanasar would serve no meaningful purpose. 
Because the identified reasons for dismissal are dispositive of the Petitioner's appeal, we decline to 
reach and hereby reserve remaining arguments concerning eligibility under the third Dhanasar prong. 
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 l&N Dec. 516, 526 n.7 (BIA 2015) (declining to reach alternative issues on appeal where 
an applicant is otherwise ineligible). 
The appeal will be dismissed for the above stated reasons. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
11