dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Graphic Design

U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services 
Ofice ofAdministrative Appeals MS 2090 
Washington, DC 20529-2090 
iakn\i biI~ CG:JM~ '8 U.S. Citizenship 
@* ~eflt c!tmry ~a~@(h( 
 and Immigration 
ifivasion ~fpd N&W Services 
LIN 08 11 1 50966 
PETITION: 
 Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker as a Member of the Professions Holding an Advanced 
Degree or an Alien of Exceptional Ability Pursuant to Section 203(b)(2) of the Immigration 
and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. $ 1 153(b)(2) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
INSTRUCTIONS: 
This is the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office in your case. All documents have been returned to 
the office that originally decided your case. Any further inquiry must be made to that office. 
If you believe the law was inappropriately applied or you have additional information that you wish to have 
considered, you may file a motion to reconsider or a motion to reopen. Please refer to 8 C.F.R. $ 103.5 for 
the specific requirements. All motions must be submitted to the office that originally decided your case by 
filing a Form I-290B, Notice of Appeal or Motion, with a fee of $585. Any motion must be filed within 30 
days of the decision that the motion seeks to reconsider or reopen, as required by 8 C.F.R. 5 103.5(a)(l)(i). 
uhn F. Grissom 
Acting Chief, Administrative Appeals Office 
DISCUSSION: The Director, Nebraska Service Center, denied the employment-based immigrant visa 
petition. The matter is now before the Administrative Appeals'Office (AAO) on appeal. The AAO will 
dismiss the appeal. 
The petitioner seeks classification pursuant to section 203(b)(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act 
(the Act), 8 U.S.C. 5 1153(b)(2), as an alien of exceptional ability in the arts and as a member of the 
professions holding an advanced degree. The petitioner seeks employment as a graphic artist and art 
director for Graphic & Creativity LLC, a company apparently owned by the petitioner and her spouse. 
The petitioner asserts that an exemption from the requirement of a job offer, and thus of a labor 
certification, is in the national interest of the United States. The director found that the petitioner failed 
to show that she qualifies for classification as an alien of exceptional ability in the arts or as a member 
of the professions holding an advanced degree, or that an exemption from the requirement of a job offer 
would be in the national interest of the United States. 
On appeal, counsel indicates that a brief will be forthcoming within 30 days. To date, six months 
after the filing of the appeal, the record contains no further substantive submission from the 
petitioner. We therefore consider the record to be complete as it now stands. 
Section 203(b) of the Act states, in pertinent part: 
(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) . . . the 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. 
The first issue under consideration is whether the petitioner qualifies for classification under section 
203(b)(2) of the Act, either as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree, or as an alien 
of exceptional ability in the arts. The regulation at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(k)(2) provides the following 
definitions: 
Page 3 
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 into the occupation. 
The petition must be accompanied by documentation showing that the alien is a professional holding 
an advanced degree or an alien of exceptional ability in the sciences, the arts, or business. 
PROFESSIONAL HOLDING AN ADVANCED DEGREE 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(k)(3)(i) states that, to show that the alien is a professional holding 
an advanced degree, the petition must be accompanied by: 
(A) An official academic record showing that the alien has an United States advanced 
degree or a foreign equivalent degree; or 
(B) An official academic record showing that the alien 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 alien has at least five 
years of progressive post-baccalaureate experience in the specialty. 
The petitioner's initial submission included an uncertified ETA Form 9089, Application for Permanent 
Employment Certification. The petitioner signed the form under penalty of perjury. In Part H of this 
form, the petitioner indicated that her position requires, at a minimum, a bachelor's degree and five 
years of experience. Asked "Is there an alternate combination of education and experience that is 
acceptable," the petitioner answered "No." In Part I of the form, the petitioner indicated that the 
position is "a professional occupation . . . for which a bachelor's degree (or equivalent) is normally 
required" (emphasis in original). Under "Employer's name," the petitioner listed her own name. The 
petitioner did not specify how the lack of a bachelor's degree and five years of experience would 
prevent her from working as a graphlc artist. 
On ETA Form 9089, under "Occupation Title," the petitioner wrote "Graphic Designer." Asked "Are 
the job opportunity's requirements normal for the occupation," the petitioner answered "Yes." 
According to O*NET (the Occupational Information Network), barely half of graphic designers (55%) 
Page 4 
between the ages of 25 and 44 hold bachelor's degrees.' Therefore, we cannot conclude that the 
occupation of graphic designer is a professional occupation requiring at least a bachelor's degree. The 
petitioner cannot change this simply by declaring that her work requires a bachelor's degree. 
In a statement accompanying the initial submission, counsel stated that the petitioner "holds a 
bachelor's degree in graphic arts," but neither counsel nor the petitioner (on ETA Form 9089) specified 
where the petitioner earned that claimed degree. The petitioner submitted a copy of a certificate fiom 
the Toulouse-Lautrec Institute of Communications and Design, Lima, Peru, indicating that the 
petitioner studied there fiom autumn 1994 to summer 1997, and "obtained the Title . . . of Technical 
Professional in GRAPHIC DESIGN (emphasis in original). The petitioner submitted no credential 
evaluation or other documentation to establish that this three-year certificate is equivalent to a United 
States bachelor's degree (which is typically a four-year degree). 
On August 22, 2008, the director issued a request for evidence (WE). In the WE, the director stated 
that the petitioner's three-year certificate is not equivalent to a four-year United States bachelor's 
degree. In response, counsel stated: "We are . . . submitting an expert evaluation that the degree is 
equivalent to a U.S. Bachelor's degree." 
The petitioner actually submitted two evaluations. The first was prepared by - of 
Career Consulting ~nternational.~ stated that the petitioner's "Education is Equivalent to 
US Bachelor of Fine Art Degree," but did not explain how she reached this conclusion except to 
state that the "Instituto de Educacion Superior Tecnologico Privado Toulouse Lautrec requires 
graduation from high school." 
The second, more detailed evaluation, is from 
 President of Marquess Educational 
Consultants, Ltd. and the European-American Universlty'!tated that his evaluation "is based on 
informed opinion as an expert in the field of international credentials"; he cited no particular sources 
with specific regard to the institution where the petitioner studied, or to education in Peru. Most of 
the lengthy evaluation discusses the general proposition that a three-year degree can be equivalent to 
a four-year United States bachelor's degree. 
In his evaluation concluding that the beneficiary's three-year degree following 12 years of primary 
and secondary education is equivalent to 120 credits and a four-year degree in the United States, 
I 
 Source: http://online.onetcenter.ora/link/details/27-lO24.OO#Education (visited June 30,2009; copy added to record). 
In her evaluation, 
 indicated that she has "a Masters degree from the Institute of Transpersonal 
Psychology and a doctorate from French Ecole Superieure Universitaire Robert de Sorbon," but did not indicate the field 
in which she obtained her doctorate. According to its website, htt~://www.sorbon.fr/indexI.html, Ecole Superieure 
Robert de Sorbon awards degrees based on past experience rather than academic study. (Site visited June 30,2009; copy 
added to record.) While indicates that she is a member of the American Evaluation Association (AEA), 
the Association of International Educators (NAFSA) and the European Association for International Education (EAIE), 
the record does not show that any of these organizations require proof of expertise as a condition of membership. The 
payment of dues does not confer any expertise. 
Like 
 claimed a doctoral degree ("in Humanities") from the Ecole Superieure Robert de 
Sorbon, which awards degrees on the basis of experience rather than academic study. 
relied on Snapnames.com, Inc v Chertofl 2006 WL 3491005 (D. Or. 2006). The 
judge in that case, however, found that U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) is 
kntitled to deference in interpreting its own regulatory definition of advanced degree. Id. at 11. 
Even if we were to accept all of 
 general claims (which we do not), it would not 
compel a finding that every three-year degree is equivalent to a four-year United States bachelor's 
degree. (Several of the quoted sources in the evaluation itself indicate that such degrees are 
considered "on a case-by-case basis," which by definition rules out automatic acceptance of such 
degrees.) In the small section of the evaluation devoted specifically to the petitioner's education, the 
evaluator stated that the petitioner "has completed a three year full-time program . . . that requires 
high school graduation . . . for entry." This establishes that the petitioner holds a postsecondary 
degree, but not every postsecondary degree is at least equivalent to a bachelor's degree (an 
associate's degree, for instance, is below a bachelor's degree). 
The evaluator also asserted that the petitioner's degree "is not merely an academic award, it is a 
license to practice her profession . . . It is thus in every respect functionally equivalent to a 
bachelor's degree in graphic design." This argument rests on the presumption that graphic design is 
a profession requiring at least a bachelor's degree. The petitioner has submitted nothing to establish 
that a bachelor's degree is, in fact, a minimum condition for employment as a graphic designer. We 
reiterate here that O*NET, a source affiliated with the Bureau of Labor Statistics and considerably 
more official and authoritative than indicates that 45% of United States graphic 
designers between the ages of 25 and 44 do not hold bachelor's degrees. Given this information, we 
cannot reasonably find that graphic design is a "profession" requiring at least a bachelor's degree. 
This is doubly so in a situation where the petitioner is essentially self-employed, and there is no 
known mechanism by which the lack of a bachelor's degree would prevent a self-employed graphic 
designer from working in the United States. 
The director denied the petition on November 10, 2008, stating "the petitioner does not hold a 
United States baccalaureate degree or a foreign equivalent degree. Hence, the petitioner does not 
qualify as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree." 
On appeal, counsel asserts that the director failed to give due weight to the "credential evaluation 
report and expert opinion" submitted previously. USCIS uses an evaluation by a credentials 
evaluation organization of a person's foreign education as an advisory opinion only. Where an 
evaluation is not in accord with previous equivalencies or is in any way questionable, it may be 
discounted or given less weight. Matter of Sea, Inc., 19 I&N Dec. 817, 820 (Cornmr. 1988); see also 
Matter of Caron International, 19 I&N Dec. 791, 795 (Commr. 1988). For reasons already 
explained, we find the opinions proffered by Sheila Danzig and John Kersey to be questionable. 
Also, whatever the situation with the petitioner's degree, the petitioner has submitted nothing to 
establish that graphic design is a profession (requiring at least a bachelor's degree) in the United 
States. An alien in a non-professional field cannot qualify as a member of the professions holding an 
advanced degree, no matter what that alien's academic achievements. 
We agree with the director's finding that the petitioner has not established that she is eligible for 
classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree or its defined equivalent. 
EXCEPTIONAL ABILITY 
Counsel has also claimed that the petitioner qualifies for classification as an alien of exceptional ability 
in the arts. The regulation at 8 C.F.R. $ 204.5(k)(3)(ii) sets forth six criteria, at least three of which an 
alien must meet in order to qualify as an alien of exceptional ability in the sciences, the arts, or business: 
(A) 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; 
(B) Evidence in the form of letter(s) from current or former employer(s) showing that 
the alien has at least ten years of hll-time experience in the occupation for which he 
or she is being sought; 
(C) A license to practice the profession or certification for a particular profession or 
occupation; 
(D) Evidence that the alien has commanded a salary, or other remuneration for 
services, which demonstrates exceptional ability; 
(E) Evidence of membership in professional associations; or 
(F) Evidence of recognition for achievements and significant contributions to the 
industry or field by peers, governmental entities, or professional or business 
organizations. 
The petitioner's initial submission did not address the issue of exceptional ability, as the focus was on 
the advanced degree claim. In the RFE, the director requested "[elvidence that the self-petitioner has 
. . . exceptional ability . . . in the field of Graphc Designing. See 8 CFR Section 204.5(k)(3)(ii)." In 
response, counsel stated that the petitioner "has the equivalent of a four year bachelor's degree in 
addition to five years of experience in the field of graphic design. Also, based on the fact that [the 
petitioner] received the PADIS Award in Peru, that she is an individual of exceptional ability." We will 
discuss the award futher below. 
The director, in denying the petition, stated that the petitioner had addressed only two of the six 
regulatory criteria at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(k)(3)(ii), and therefore "has not demonstrated exceptional 
ability." On appeal, counsel states that the petitioner "submitted evidence in four catergories [sic] to 
establish that she is an alien of exceptional ability." We will address this claim here. 
We note that the regulation at 8 C.F.R. tj 204.5@)(2) defines "exceptional ability" as "a degree of 
expertise significantly above that ordinarily encountered" in a given area of endeavor. Therefore, 
evidence submitted to establish exceptional ability must somehow place the alien above others in the 
field in order to fulfill the criteria below. Qualifications possessed by all or most workers in a given 
field cannot demonstrate "a degree of expertise significantly above that ordinarily encountered." For 
example, every qualified physician has a college degree and a license or certification, but it defies logic 
to claim that every physician therefore shows "exceptional" traits. 
The petitioner claims to have met the following four regulatory criteria: 
An official academic record showing that the alien has a degree, diploma, certijicate, 
or similar award from a college, university, school, or other institution of learning 
relating to the area of exceptional ability. 8 C.F.R. tj 204.5(k)(3)(ii)(A) 
We have already discussed, at some length, the petitioner's three-year certificate from the Toulouse- 
Lautrec Institute. We have also, however, shown that 55% of graphic artists in the United States 
hold bachelor's degrees. Even if we were to grant that the petitioner's certificate is equivalent to a 
bachelor's degree, such a degree is not a level of education significantly above that ordinarily 
encountered among graphic designers. A bachelor's degree is not a minimum requirement for 
employment' as a graphic designer, but "above the minimum" is not the same thing as "significantly 
above that ordinarily encountered." Because the majority of graphic designers hold bachelor's 
degrees, a bachelor's degree is "ordinarily encountered" in the field of graphic design. 
The petitioner has not satisfied 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. 5 204.5(k)(3)(ii)(B) 
Counsel, on appeal, claims that the petitioner "submitted letters from former employers, which 
totalled 10 years experience." Counsel does not elaborate, and we cannot find such evidence in the 
record. Section K of ETA Form 9089, "Alien Work Experience," begins with the instruction to 
"[llist all jobs the alien has held during the past 3 years. Also list any other experience that qualifies 
the alien for the job opportunity." The petitioner and counsel (who prepared the form) left this 
section blank. 
On Form G-325A, Biographic Information (submitted with the petitioner's Form 1-485 adjustment 
application), the petitioner claimed to have worked for "Estudio A." from October 2000 to October 
2001, and for -1 from October 2001 to January 2002. The petitioner stated that 
she has been self-employed since 2002. 
of Studioa indicated that the petitioner "provided services to our company as a 
Graphic Designer for a period of five months in the year 2002." 
 of 
Disefio & Estraterria stated that the ~etitioner "worked under mv supervision during a period of five 
" " A - A 
years as Director of Art." - did not specify the dates of this five year 
period, except to state that the company won an award in 2003 because of the petitioner's work. The 
described periods of employment conflict with the dates provided by the petitioner on Form 
G-325A. In terms of the petitioner's self-employment, the petitioner has submitted letters from one 
client, 
 who met the petitioner in 2006. This evidence is not sufficient to establish ten 
years of full-time experience as a graphic artist. 
A license to practice the profession or certlJication for a particular profession or 
occupation. 8 C.F.R. 5 204S(k)(3)(ii)(C) 
Counsel states that the petitioner "received [a] professional certificate" over and above her three- 
year diploma, but the record appears to contain no such document. One of the petitioner's evaluators 
had previously claimed that the petitioner's "certificate" is the same as her "degree" from the 
Toulouse-Lautrec Institute, rather than a separate credential. 
The petitioner has not satisfied this criterion. 
Evidence of recognition for achievements and sign2Jicant contributions to the industry 
or field by peers, governmental entities, or professional or business organizations. 
8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(k)(3)(ii)(F) 
The initial submission contains a translated certificate showing that the petitioner was a "First 
Finalist" in the 2003 PADIS design contest, held biannually by the Toulouse-Lautrec Institute. This 
prize appears to constitute qualifying recognition, thereby satisfying this criterion. Because the 
petitioner has not satisfied any other criteria at 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(k)(3)(ii), however, we agree with 
the director's finding that the petitioner has not shown that she qualifies as an alien of exceptional 
ability in the arts. 
NATIONAL INTEREST WAIVER 
The remaining issue is whether the petitioner has established that a waiver of the job offer requirement, 
and thus a labor certification, is in the national interest. 
Because the petitioner has not demonstrated eligibility for the underlying immigrant classification, she 
cannot qualifl for the national interest waiver. In the interest of thoroughness, however, we will 
consider the petitioner's waiver claim here. 
Neither the statute nor the pertinent regulations define the term "national interest." Additionally, 
Congress did not provide a specific definition of "in the national interest." The Committee on the 
Judiciary merely noted in its report to the Senate that the committee had "focused on national interest by 
increasing the number and proportion of visas for immigrants who would benefit the United States 
economically and otherwise. . . ." S. Rep. No. 55, 10 1 st Cong., 1 st Sess., 1 1 (1 989). 
Supplementary information to regulations implementing the Immigration Act of 1990 (IMMACT), 
published at 56 Fed. Reg. 60897,60900 (November 29, 1991), states: 
The Service [now USCIS] believes it appropriate to leave the application of this test 
as flexible as possible, although clearly an alien seeking to meet the [national interest] 
standard must make a showing significantly above that necessary to prove the 
"prospective national benefit" [required of aliens seeking to qualify as "exceptional."] 
The burden will rest with the alien to establish that exemption from, or waiver of, the 
job offer will be in the national interest. Each case is to be judged on its own merits. 
Matter of New York State Dept. of Transportation, 22 I&N Dec. 215 (Cornmr. 1998), has set forth 
several factors which must be considered when evaluating a request for a national interest waiver. First, 
it must be shown that the alien seeks employment in an area of substantial intrinsic merit. Next, it must 
be shown that the proposed benefit will be national in scope. Finally, the petitioner seeking the waiver 
must establish that the alien will serve the national interest to a substantially greater degree than would 
an available U.S. worker having the same minimum qualifications. 
It must be noted that, while the national interest waiver hinges on prospective national benefit, it clearly 
must be established that the alien's past record justifies projections of future benefit to the national 
interest. The petitioner's subjective assurance that the alien will, in the future, serve the national interest 
cannot suffice to establish prospective national benefit. The inclusion of the term "prospective" is used 
here to require future contributions by the alien, rather than to facilitate the entry of an alien with no 
demonstrable prior achievements, and whose benefit to the national interest would thus be entirely 
speculative. 
The initial submission included the following assertions fiom counsel: 
[The petitioner's] unique skills have contributed to the advancement of the education of 
young aspiring soccer players. The advancements that [the petitioner] has contributed 
are significant. [The petitioner] is the illustrator for the book series "The Magic Soccer 
Ball." These books are published nationally, and sold by large companies such as 
Border's [sic] Books and Amazon Book company [sic]. . . . The series would not be as 
successful without the creative illustrations provided in the book. 
The record (which includes copies of books in The Magic Soccer Ball series) shows that the petitioner is 
not "the illustrator" of those books, but rather a co-illustrator with her spouse. Counsel did not explain 
why the petitioner's work on children's athletic instructional books is so significant as to qualifjr her for 
the national interest waiver. It may well be that the design of the books' illustrations is integral to the 
overall impact of the series, but the petitioner has not established the impact of that series. The books' 
authors -and self-published the books through AuthorHouse and Xlibris. 
Their availability through national retailers - particularly online sellers such as Amazon - does not 
imply that the books enjoy significant sales. The books are clearly intended to teach soccer skills to 
young children, but this does not mean that the books have had, or will have, a significant influence in 
this area. 
In the August 2008 RFE, the director asked for evidence to show that the petitioner's work has had 
sufficient impact to warrant a national interest waiver, and to show that the petitioner's "talent will serve 
the national interest of the United States to a substantially greater extent than other Graphic ArtistJArt 
Director[s] in the field." 
In response, counsel stated that reviews of the Magic Soccer Ball books "show that [the petitioner's] 
illustrations not only enhance the book, but assist in educating young people on the rules of soccer. The 
reviews also show the books . . . have had a significant impact on the American public at large and 
people have greatly benefited from the 'Magic Soccer Ball' series." 
Magic Soccer Ball author stated that the etitioner "is a hard-working person who invariably 
understands exactly what it takes to succeed." & clearly holds a high opinion of the petitioner's 
skill and character, but he did not state that the petitioner's continued work on the book series is a 
matter of national interest. 
The petitioner submitted printouts of several World Wide Web pages discussing the Magic Soccer Ball 
books. Several of these are not "reviews" at all. An article from the Ann Arbor (Michigan) News does 
not mention the petitioner. The article, "Coach's book teaches kids soccer basics," briefly profiled the 
books' authors (who reside in the 
 Arbor area) and discussed 
 motivation to write 
instructional soccer books for children. 
Other pages, from online retailers, show product descriptions that appear to be the authors' own 
promotional blurbs for the books. Some retailers' pages also include "Customer Reviews." These 
reviews show that customers have been happy with the books, but this does not establish the extent of 
the books' influence. Many of the reviews do not mention the illustrations at all. 
The remaining submission is a review by 
 of the book The Magic Soccer Ball: Receiving 
and Trupping. The top of the page shows an lnslgnia that reads "Clarion - Review For Fee Sewice," 
indicating that the book's creators commissioned and paid for the review. There is no indication in the 
record that the book has drawn the attention of professional book reviewers who have not been 
specifically hired for the purpose. Even then, the Clarion review does not mention the petitioner, and 
there is no discussion of the illustrations apart from incidental references to "diagrams" and "a visible 
banner in the soccer field." 
None of the materials submitted support counsel's claim that "[tlhe reviews . . . show the books . . . 
have had a significant impact on the American public at large and people have greatly benefited from 
the 'Magic Soccer Ball' series." Even if the petitioner had shown that the series has been massively 
influential in children's sports education, the materials described above focus on the text of the books 
rather than the illustrations. 
In denying the petition, the director noted the petitioner's receipt of the 2003 PADIS award, but found 
that this honor "does not demonstrate influence on the field of endeavor as a whole." The director also 
found that the petitioner had not established the influence of the Magic Soccer Ball books, and that the 
materials discussing those books showed "positive feed back about the authors of the book, not the 
illustrators." The director found that the petitioner had not established significant impact on the field of 
graphic design that would warrant a national interest waiver. 
On appeal, counsel states: "Evidence was proffered to show that [the petitioner] has influenced the area 
of graphic design through the 'Magic Soccer Ball' series." Counsel does not explain the nature of this 
evidence, except to observe that some of the customer reviews complimented the illustrations as well as 
the text of the books. Customers' enjoyment of book illustrations is not influence on the field of 
graphic design. 
As is clear from a plain reading of the statute, it was not the intent of Congress that every person 
qualified to perform the duties of a particular job in the United States should be exempt from the 
requirement of a job offer based on national interest. Likewise, it does not appear to have been the 
intent of Congress to grant national interest waivers on the basis of the overall importance of a 
particular field of endeavor, rather than on the merits of the individual alien. On the basis of the 
evidence submitted, the petitioner has not established that a waiver of the requirement of an approved 
labor certification will be in the national interest of the United States. 
The appeal will be dismissed for the above stated reasons, with each considered as an independent and 
alternative basis for denial. In visa petition proceedings, the burden of proving eligibility for the benefit 
sought remains entirely with the petitioner. Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 9 1361. The petitioner has 
not sustained that burden. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.