dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Financial Technology

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: JAN. 08, 2025 In Re: 36026039 
Appeal of Nebraska 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. § 1 l 53(b )(2). 
The Director ofthe Nebraska Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the Petitioner qualified 
for classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree, but that he 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 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. 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. 
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) . 
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 his proposed endeavor under the first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework. 
The Petitioner stated that his "proposed endeavor is to advance the financial services sector in the United 
States by focusing on the intersection of financial technology, regulatory compliance, and consumer 
protection." He indicated that his undertaking involves "guaranteeing regulatory compliance and 
improving consumer protection through the innovative use of advanced analytics and data science." The 
Petitioner also asserted that he planned to create "advanced analytics frameworks and real-time alerting 
systems that aim at preemptively identifying potential regulatory violations." The Petitioner further 
noted: "Leveraging his role as Digital Analytics Manager and his expertise in analytics technologies, [the 
Petitioner] plans to lead efforts in improving financial regulations and operational efficiencies by 
encouraging regulatory agencies and financial institutions to work together and by pushing for the broad 
use of analytics-driven compliance methods."2 
In response to the Director's request for evidence, the Petitioner stated: 
As the Digital Analytics Manager at I I I have led important projects that 
substantially increased the bank's analytical capabilities, particularly through the 
development of over forty Tableau dashboards. These innovations have streamlined 
operational processes and have also elevated customer service standards, thereby 
supporting the bank's strategic transition towards data-driven decision-making and 
compliance with financial regulations. 
Upon securing the EB-2, my ambition is to further my contribution to the financial 
services sector in the United States, focusing particularly on the intersection of financial 
technology, regulatory compliance, and consumer protection. My global perspective, 
cultivated through diverse professional experiences, alongside my demonstrated 
leadership and technical understanding, uniquely positions me to drive forward 
innovations that will benefit the industry and its clientele. 
2 At the time of filing, the Petitioner was working for as a Digital Analytics Manager. He indicated that his 
work involves managing "a team of high performing digital analysts to support digital platform and product initiatives 
with analytics and insights to measure and improve product implementation, performance, and experience." As the 
Petitioner is applying for a waiver of the job offer requirement, it is not necessary for him to have a job offer from a specific 
employer. However, we will consider information about his position to illustrate the capacity in which he intends to work 
in order to determine whether the proposed endeavor meets the requirements of the Dhanasar framework. 
2 
In the future, I plan to actively participate in federal banking communities and continue 
to gain advanced certifications in financial regulations. This ensures I stay informed 
about regulatory challenges and have a solid foundation to advocate for and implement 
technological innovations that enhance consumer protection and promote regulatory 
compliance within the U.S. financial sector. 
In conclusion, my extensive experience and leadership in the fields of data analytics 
and digital innovation within the financial services sector render me a valuable asset to 
the United States. My dedication to advancing regulatory compliance, consumer 
protection, and technological innovation aligns with the critical needs of the industry. 
I am confident that my continued endeavors in this field will promote economic growth, 
drive technological advancements, and contribute to a more secure and equitable 
financial system. My professional journey in the U.S. has equipped me with the 
insights, network, and expertise necessary to make lasting contributions to the financial 
technology landscape. 
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. Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. 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. 
The Director concluded, however, that the Petitioner did not establish the national importance of his 
proposed endeavor. In determining whether the proposed endeavor has national importance, we 
consider its potential prospective impact. Id. at 889. 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 the potential prospective impact of 
his proposed work. 3 
On appeal, the Petitioner asserts that the Director's decision disregarded the users policy update 
relating to "National Interest Waivers" from January 2022 relating to "evidentiary considerations for 
people with advanced degrees in STEM." While the policy update explains how the Dhanasar 
framework can apply to science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) graduates and 
entrepreneurs, the Petitioner still must meet the three prongs set forth in Dhanasar to establish it is in 
the national interest that users waive the requirement of a job offer, and thus the labor certification. 
3 The Director stated that the Petitioner "did not offer sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the proposed endeavor stands 
to have implications beyond and its clientele to impact the field more broadly or to have substantial positive 
economic effects." 
3 
The Petitioner argues that "he has a plan to benefit the United States by enhancing consumer 
protection, and that this plan is something that he has the expertise and connections to do, regardless 
of his position at I He asserts that his plan "was fully thought out and cannot be fairly 
reduced to a single set ofjob duties at a single company." The Petitioner points to a letter from W-J-
Vice President and Senior Digital Analytics Manager atl Iwho stated: 
I want to recognize the ways in which [the Petitioner's] work goes beyond the scope of 
our company. As a leader in digital regulatory compliance and financial analytics, [the 
Petitioner's] exceptional work has empowered U.S. citizens and customers to access 
banking services more easily, securely, and transparently, while protecting their 
personal data and providing them with more reliable lending options. As such, I can 
attest that his work whether at _______ has impacted our industry in 
ways that extend far beyond the narrow scope of an individual organization. 
While the Petitioner's proposed endeavor may improve business operations for his current or future 
employers and services for their customers, he has not provided evidence demonstrating that his proposed 
consumer protection and banking projects would affect the U.S. financial services sector 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. 
The letter from W-J- also discussed the Petitioner's work for I I on its "Email Marketing 
Preference Dashboards" and other assigned projects as well as his mentoring of coworkers. 4 The 
Petitioner presented additional letters of support from V-P-, K-T-, M-C-, M-G-, P-R-, and S-D- further 
describing his data analytics capabilities and experience. 5 The Petitioner's skills, knowledge, and 
prior work in his field 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 he proposes to undertake has national importance under Dhanasar 's first prong. 
In addition, the Petitioner provided an "Analysis and Advisory Evaluation" letter from Dr. J-C-, 
Professor of Mathematics at the _________________ in support of his 
national interest waiver. Dr. J-C- contends that the Petitioner's proposed work is of national 
importance because his generic occupation of data analytics manager and the financial services sector 
in which he works stand to benefit the U.S. economy. The issue here, however, is not the national 
importance of the profession or industry in which the individual will work; instead, we focus on the 
"the specific endeavor that the foreign national proposes to undertake." Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 
889. The letter from Dr. J-C- and the other letters of support do not contain sufficient information and 
explanation, nor does the record include adequate corroborating evidence, to show that the Petitioner's 
4 The Petitioner's "Personal Statement" indicated that he planned to offer "mentorship programs" at his company. While 
this work has substantial merit, the record does not establish that his proposed mentorship activities stand to impact the 
data analytics field or financial services industry more broadly, as opposed to being limited to his mentees. Accordingly, 
without sufficient documentary evidence of their broader impact, the Petitioner's proposed mentorship activities do not 
meet the "national importance" element of the first prong of the Dhanasar framework. Likewise, 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. 
5 V-P-, K-T-. and P-R-'s letters also comment on the importance of data analytics managers in general. 
4 
specific proposed work offers broader implications in his field or industry or substantial positive 
economic effects for our nation that rise to the level of national importance . 
The Petitioner also submitted articles on the importance of ensuring that financial institutions comply 
with consumer protection laws, minimizing economic impact on small businesses while ensuring 
consumer protection , maintaining technological expertise among regulatory staff overseeing financial 
technology developments, promoting innovation and technological advancement, enhancing the 
cybersecurity and resilience of the U.S . financial sector, and ensuring responsible development of 
digital assets. Furthermore, the record includes information about data scientists , critical and emerging 
technologies , and the Federal Government's research and development priorities , regulating junk fees , 
the multiplier effect of innovation jobs , White House actions to attract STEM talent, the financial 
technology industry , efforts to combat money laundering , and problems consumers experience in the 
marketplace . The Petitioner claims that these articles support the national importance of his proposed 
endeavor. The determination of national importance does not focus on the importance of one's field 
in general or of government initiatives aimed at promoting innovation and improving the U.S. 
economy, but "focuses on the specific endeavor that the foreign national proposes to undertake." Id. 
at 889. Here, none of the aforementioned articles mention the Petitioner or his planned projects, or 
otherwise speak to the potential prospecti ve impact of his specific proposed endeavor. 
The Petitioner contends that his "proposed endeavor has national importance on the basis that it will 
enhance fmancial stability and economic growth in the United States" and promote "job creation" in 
our country. As for the job creation and economic effects that the Petitioner asserts his proposed endeavor 
will offer, the record does not contain sufficient supporting evidence. The preponderance of the evidence 
standard requires the evidence demonstrate that the petitioner's claim is probably true, where the 
determination of truth is made based on the factual circumstances of each individual case. Matter of 
Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. at 376. In evaluating the evidence, truth is to be determined not by the quantity 
of evidence alone but by its quality. See id. Here, lack of supporting details and evidence detracts from 
the probative value of the Petitioner's claim regarding job creation or other substantial positive economic 
effects. 
The Petitioner further argues that his "innovative approach to regulatory compliance can stimulate further 
innovation in the financial technology sector," but he does not explain the originality of his specific 
approach or provide evidence that it stands to have broader implications in his field or industry beyond 
his employer and its customers. He also asserts that his "proposed endeavor strengthens national security 
and consumer protection." The Petitioner, however, has not provided evidence showing that his specific 
proposed work would affect U.S. consumers or our country's national security more broadly at a level 
commensurate with national importance. 
To evaluate whether the Petitioner's proposed endeavor satisfies the national importance requirement 
we look to evidence documenting the "potential prospective impact" of his work. While the 
Petitioner's statements reflect his intention to provide data analytics s ervices for his employer that 
ensure regulatory compliance and improve consumer protection, he has n ot offered sufficient 
information and evidence to demonstrate that the prospective impact of his proposed endeavor rises 
to the level of national importance. In Dhana sar, 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 his proposed 
5 
endeavor stands to sufficiently extend beyond his employer and its customers to impact his field, the 
financial services industry, our country 's national security, or the U.S . economy more broadly at a 
level commensurate with national importance. 
Furthermore, the Petitioner has not demonstrated that the specific endeavor he proposes to undertake 
has significant potential to employ U.S . workers or otherwise offers substantial positive economic 
effects for our nation. Without sufficient information or evidence regarding any projected U.S. economic 
impact or job creation attributable to his future work, the record does not show that benefits to the regional 
or national economy resulting from the Petitioner's projects would reach the level of"substantial positive 
economic effects" contemplated by Dhanasar . Id. at 890. 
The Petitioner has not established that his 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. 
B. The Remaining Dhanasar Prongs 
Because the documentation in the record does not establish the national importance of his proposed 
endeavor as required by the first prong of the Dhanasar precedent decision, the Petitioner has not 
demonstrated eligibility for a national interest waiver. As this issue is dispositive of the Petitioner's 
appeal, we need not reach, and therefore 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) (per curiam) 
(holding that agencies are not required to make "purely advisory findings" on issues that are 
unnecessary to the ultimate decision). 
III. CONCLUSION 
As the Petitioner has not met the requisite first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework, we conclude 
that he has not established he 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. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
6