dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Financial Management

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: FEB. 15, 2024 In Re: 29836606 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner 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 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 Texas Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the Petitioner qualified 
for classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree, but that she had not 
established 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. 
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 l&N Dec. 537, 537 n.2 (AAO 2015). Upon de novo 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. Section 203(b )(2)(B)(i) of the Act. If a 
petitioner demonstrates eligibility for the underlying EB-2 classification, they must then establish 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: 
1 See also Flores v. Garland, 72 F.4th 85 , 88 (5th Cir. 2023) (joining the Ninth, Eleventh, and D.C. Circuit Courts (and 
Third in an unpublished decision) in concluding that USCIS ' decision to grant or deny a national interest waiver to be 
discretionary in nature). 
• 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. 
II. ANALYSIS 
The Director found that the Petitioner qualifies as a member of the professions holding an advanced 
degree. The remaining issue to be determined is whether the Petitioner has established that a waiver of 
the requirement of a job offer, and thus a labor certification, would be in the national interest. For the 
reasons discussed below, we conclude that the Petitioner has not sufficiently demonstrated the national 
importance of her proposed endeavor under the first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework. 
With respect to her proposed endeavor, the Petitioner indicated that she intends "to open a Financial 
Management Consulting, Advisory and Training Office, and it will be headquartered in the I I 
region, Florida." She further stated: "This business will offer professional services in financial planning, 
control, reporting, balance sheet analysis, risk assessment, market economic trends and financial 
auditing." 
In addition, the Petitioner submitted the business plan for her proposed company. This business plan 
includes industry and market analyses, information about her company and its services, financial 
forecasts and projections, marketing strategies, a discussion of the Petitioner's work experience, and 
a description of company personnel. Regarding future staffing, the Petitioner's business plan 
anticipates that her company will employ five personnel in year one, six in years two and three, and eight 
in years four and five, but she did not elaborate on these projections or provide evidence supporting 
the need for these additional employees. Furthermore, while her plan offers revenue projections of 
$591,360 in year one, $792,000 in years two and three, $1,182,720 in years four and five, these 
projections are not supported by details showing their basis or an explanation of how they will be 
achieved. 
The record includes information about the U.S. financial advisory industry, job prospects in the United 
States for financial managers, Florida employment trends, immigrants as economic contributors, and 
the value of small businesses to the U.S. economy. Here, the Director concluded that the submitted 
information establishes the Petitioner's endeavor has substantial merit. In determining national 
importance, however, the relevant question is not the value of small businesses, financial management 
services, immigrant entrepreneurship, or the Petitioner's general occupation; instead, we focus on the 
"the specific endeavor that the foreign national proposes to undertake." See Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. 
at 889. The Petitioner must still demonstrate the potential prospective impact of her specific proposed 
endeavor. 
The Petitioner also provided letters of support from A-M-, C-A-, M-E-S-, L-R-A-, T-A-B-, A-C-M­
C-, P-G-A-, V-S-F-, and L-B- discussing her financial management capabilities and experience. The 
Petitioner's education, skills, knowledge, and prior work in her field, however, 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. 
2 
Furthermore, the Petitioner submitted an "Expert Opinion Letter" from J-W-B-, a professor of finance 
at I I in support of her national interest waiver. J-W-B- contended that the 
Petitioner's proposed work is of national importance because her generic occupation of financial 
manager, the management consulting industry, and the financial advisory services industry stand to 
contribute to our nation's economy, enhance societal welfare, and advance White House initiatives 
(such as attracting "STEM talent"). The issue here, however, is not the national importance of the 
field, 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. The 
letter from J-W-B- does not contain sufficient information and explanation, nor does the record include 
adequate corroborating evidence, to show that the Petitioner's specific proposed work operating a 
financial management company offers broader implications in her industry, enhancements to U.S. 
societal welfare, or substantial positive economic effects for our nation that rise to the level of national 
importance. 
In the decision denying the petition, the Director determined that the Petitioner had not established the 
national importance of her proposed endeavor. The Director stated that the Petitioner had not 
demonstrated that her undertaking has national implications within a particular field or industry. In 
addition, the Director indicated that the Petitioner had not shown that her proposed work "has significant 
potential to employ U.S. workers or otherwise offers substantial positive economic effects for our nation." 
In her appeal brief: the Petitioner argues that "financial manager consulting is a critical function for 
companies around the world, including in the United States," and it contributes "to the success and 
survival of companies." She further indicates that "[f]inancial manager consulting can help a company 
maximize its profits, manage its debt and investments, make long-term strategic decisions, and ensure 
compliance with applicable financial laws and regulations," but these arguments address the value of her 
occupation in general rather than the national importance of her specific proposed endeavor. 
Furthermore, the Petitioner asserts that her company plans on "hiring 8 professionals" and stands to 
"generate from 16.61 to 59.93 indirect jobs." She also claims that her proposed endeavor offers supply 
chain potential, a source of government tax revenue, knowledge transfer to her employees, and other 
positive economic effects. Moreover, the Petitioner states that she will devote "5% of my future 
company's budget ... to carry out cultural and social actions in the local community." The Petitioner, 
however, has not provided evidence demonstrating that her proposed business and community activities 
would operate on such a scale as to rise to a level of national importance. It is insufficient to claim an 
endeavor has national importance or would create a broad impact without providing evidence to 
substantiate such claims. Furthermore, while any basic economic activity has the potential to 
positively impact the economy, the Petitioner has not demonstrated how the potential economic 
activity of her specific endeavor stands to generate substantial positive economic effects in the region 
where her company will operate or in other parts of the United States. 
In addition, the Petitioner contends that her undertaking "helps to ensure the long-term sustainability" of 
"Florida's hospitals and eye clinics," contributes "to the industry's economic growth and generating high­
quality jobs," and "will play a key role for both Florida and the United States in terms of financial 
sustainability, operational efficiency and supporting the growth of these specific sectors." She further 
asserts that her proposed endeavor stands to strengthen the health sector, support the growth and success 
of consulting firms, and improve financial transparency and governance. 
3 
In determining national importance, we explained in Dhanasar 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 implication s within a particular field." Id. at 889. 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. 
To evaluate whether the Petitioner's proposed endeavor satisfies the national importance requirement 
we look to evidence documenting the "potential prospective impact" of her work. While the 
Petitioner 's statements reflect her intention to provide valuable financial management services to her 
company 's clients, she has n ot offered sufficient information and evidence to demonstrate that the 
prospective impact of her 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 conclude the 
Petitioner has not shown that her proposed endeavor stands to sufficiently extend beyond her company 
and its future clientele to impact her field, the financial services industry, the U.S. economy, or U.S. 
societal welfare more broadly at a level commensurate with national importance. 
Furthermore , the Petitioner has not shown that the specific endeavor she proposes to undertake has 
significant potential to employ U.S. workers or otherwise offers substantial positive economic effects 
for our nation . Specifically, she has not demonstrated that her company's future staffing levels and 
business activity stand to provide substantial economic benefits in Florida or the United States. While 
the Petitioner claims that her company has growth potential, she has not presented evidence indicating 
that the benefits to the regional or national economy resulting from her undertaking would reach the level 
of "substantial positive economic effects" contemplated by Dhanasar. Id. at 890. In addition, although 
the Petitioner asserts that her endeavor "has the potential to employ workers both directly and indirectly," 
she has not offered sufficient evidence that her endeavor offers Florida or the United States a 
substantial economic benefit through employment levels, tax revenue, or business activity. 
For the aforementioned reasons , the Petitioner's propo sed work does not meet the first prong of the 
Dhanasar framework. Because the documentation in the record does not establish the national 
importance of her 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 dis positive 
of the Petitioner's appeal, we decline to reach and hereby reserve the appellate arguments regarding 
her eligibility under the third prong outlined in Dhanasar. 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). 
III. CONCLUSION 
As the Petitioner has not met the requisite first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework, we conclude 
that she has not established she 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. 
4 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
5