dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Healthcare

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: SEP. 29, 2023 In Re: 28547098 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, a healthcare entrepreneur, seeks classification as a member of the professions holding 
an advanced degree. Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 203(b)(2), 8 U .S.C. 
§ 1153(b )(2). The Petitioner also seeks a national interest waiver of the job offer requirement that is 
attached to this EB-2 immigrant classification. Section 203(b )(2)(B)(i) of the Act. U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration Services (USCIS) may grant this discretionary waiver of the required job offer, and 
thus of a labor certification, when it is in the national interest to do so. 
The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the record did not 
establish that the Petitioner 's endeavor would have national importance, that she is well-positioned to 
advance that endeavor, or that, on balance, it would benefit the United States to waive the job offer 
requirement.' The matter is now before us on appeal. 8 C.F.R. § 103.3. 
The Petitioner bears the burden of proof to demonstrate eligibility by a preponderance of the evidence. 
Matter ofChawathe , 25 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 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 )(2) of the Act. 
Neither the statute nor the pertinent regulations define the term "national interest." Matter of 
Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. 884 (AAO 2016) states that after EB-2 eligibility has been established, USCIS 
may, as a matter of discretion, grant a national interest waiver if the petitioner demonstrates that: 
(1) the noncitizen's proposed endeavor has both substantial merit and national importance; (2) that the 
1 While not mentioned in the denial decision, the Director stated in their request for evidence (RFE) that the Petitioner 
qualifies as an advanced degree professional , which the evidence supports. 
noncitizen is well-positioned to advance the proposed endeavor; and (3) that, on balance, it would 
benefit the United States to waive the requirements of a job offer and thus of a labor certification. 
II. ANALYSIS 
The Petitioner, a registered nurse, seeks to open a healthcare consulting and education business in 
Florida. The Director concluded that the evidence provided did not meet any of the three prongs of 
the Dhanasar test and so did not show the Petitioner's eligibility for a national interest waiver. On 
appeal, the Petitioner submits a brief contending that the Director used overly strict evidentiary 
standards and "did not give due regard" to the provided evidence. Upon review, the Petitioner has not 
established that she merits a waiver of the job offer requirement in the exercise of discretion. 
The first prong of the Dhanasar test, substantial merit and national importance, focuses on the specific 
endeavor that the Petitioner proposes to undertake. Matter of Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. An 
endeavor's merit may be demonstrated in a range of areas, such as business, entrepreneurialism, 
science, technology, culture, health, or education. Id. The national importance of an endeavor is 
determined by examining its potential impact. Id. An endeavor may qualify if, for instance, it has 
national implications within a particular field, or if it has significant potential to have a substantial 
economic effect, especially in an economically depressed area. Id. In this instance, the Director 
concluded that while the Petitioner's endeavor has substantial merit, she did not provide sufficient 
documentation to establish that it would have an impact rising to the level of national importance. 
On appeal, the Petitioner states that the endeavor will be nationally important due to the "ripple 
effects" her activities will generate for the nationally important U.S. healthcare industry, such as job 
creation and the encouragement of foreign investment. Her appellate brief does not quantify any 
"ripple effects" that would be directly attributable to her endeavor or elaborate on how the endeavor 
will cause such effects, beyond simply operating as a business in the healthcare industry. While we 
acknowledge the healthcare industry's importance, the relevant question when determining whether a 
proposed endeavor would have national importance is not the importance of the industry or profession 
where the Petitioner will work, but the specific impact of that proposed endeavor. Id. at 889-90. Here, 
the record does not establish that the endeavor's impact will be nationally important. 
An endeavor may qualify under the first prong of Dhanasar if it has national implications in a 
particular field, such as those resulting from certain improved manufacturing processes or medical 
advances. Id. at 889. The Petitioner's business plan states that her company will provide nursing and 
health education services, both in-person and through telehealth. It does not document how these 
activities would constitute an advancement for the field of healthcare or nursing. While the plan states 
that the business will operate in medically underserved areas, it does not document or quantify how it 
will relieve the shortage of medical care in such areas to a nationally important extent. Nor does it 
name any specific area in Florida where it plans to operate, despite the Petitioner's claim in her 
"definitive statement" that she has "already identified some areas where the company can assist 
customers in healthcare education". 2 While we acknowledge the business plan's statement that 
telehealth services are available to customers in all locations, the fact that the company's services 
2 The business plan also mentions expansion plans that include "North and South Carolina as well as and other 
locations," but provides no further information. 
D 
2 
could be used by people in medically underserved areas does not establish that they will be, or that 
this usage will be so great it will mitigate those regions' lack of medical services. Similarly, the plan 
states that the company will operate in Florida because that state has the highest level of chronic 
disease in the United States, but does not state to what extent it proposes to affect that statistic. Without 
relevant, probative, and credible documentation of the specific impact the endeavor proposes to have 
on its field, we cannot find that this impact will be nationally important. See Matter of Chawathe, 
25 I&N Dec. at 375-76. 
The Petitioner claims that her endeavor will be nationally important due to the importance of nursing 
as a profession. However, this establishes the merit of the endeavor, not its national impact, which is 
a separate consideration under the first Dhanasar prong. Matter ofDhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889-
90. In Dhanasar, the noncitizen's work as a science teacher was found to have substantial merit but 
did not qualify him under the first prong because the evidence did not show how that work would 
impact the field of science education more broadly. Id. at 893. Similarly, as explained above, the 
Petitioner has not established that her endeavor will have an impact that extends beyond her customers 
and employees to the broader field of nursing or healthcare. 
The Petitioner further states that her endeavor has national importance due to the shortage of nurses 
in the United States. However, it is not apparent how her endeavor would resolve this shortage or 
impact it on a national level. While the endeavor may create several new nursing jobs, the United 
States does not have a shortage of such positions, but of qualified workers to fill them. We further 
note that the Department of Labor (DOL) has addressed the shortage of nurses by designating 
professional nursing as a Schedule A occupation, indicating that there are insufficient U.S. workers 
able, willing, qualified, and available for professional nursing positions. 20 C.F.R. §§ 656.5, 656.15. 
See generally 6 USCIS Policy Manual E.7(C), https://uscis.gov/policymanual. This designation 
exempts U.S. employers of noncitizen nurses from having to test the labor market and apply to DOL 
for a permanent labor certification. 20 C.F.R. § 656.15. However, this is not a waiver of the job offer 
requirement, and as such does not support a finding that nursing-related work inherently has national 
importance in the context of a national interest waiver petition. 
Regarding the endeavor's potential economic impact, the business plan states that the company will 
have 11 employees, a $527,031 payroll, and $820,629 in revenues in its fifth year of operations. 
However, the record does not include documentation establishing that this business activity would 
constitute a significant economic benefit to the United States, Florida, or any economically depressed 
region through employment levels or business activity, such that it would rise to the level of national 
importance. 
The cover letter provided in response to the Director's RFE states that the company will operate "in 
the state of Florida, an SBA HUB Zone area," 3 in order to "make a stand and an impact" by generating 
jobs, improving wages and working conditions, and encouraging regional investment. First, we note 
that only selected parts of Florida are designated HUB Zone areas. 4 As the Petitioner has not specified 
3 The HUBZone program provides preferential contracting consideration to businesses in "historically underutilized 
business zones," including economically depressed areas, qualified disaster areas, and areas where military installations 
were recently closed. See generally U.S. Small Bus. Admin., HUBZone program, https://www.sba.gov/federal­
contracting/contracting-assistance-programs/hubzone-program; 13 C.F.R. § 126. 
4 U.S. Small Bus. Admin., HUBZone Map, https://maps.certify.sba.gov/hubzone/map (last visited Sep. 27, 2023). 
3 
where her business will be located, we cannot find that it will be located in an economically depressed 
area or that it will provide economic benefits to such an area. 
The business plan uses multipliers from the U.S. Department of Commerce's Bureau of Economic 
Analysis to calculate the endeavor's total economic impact, finding that it will create a "final demand 
impact" in employment equivalent to 191 jobs, and a "final demand impact in output" of 
$1,732,808.01. First, we note that these statistics use the multipliers for the "professional, scientific, 
and technical services" industry. Given the nature of the endeavor, it is not apparent why the plan did 
not use multipliers for the healthcare or education industries. Second, the plan does not analyze these 
indirect impacts in the context of Florida's economy, and so does not establish that they would be so 
significant to that economy as to be nationally important. 
Finally, while the business plan claims that the company will lower healthcare costs through its 
education programs, it does not document or quantify this impact. See Matter of Chawathe, 25 I&N 
Dec. at 3 75-76. The fact that healthcare education, generally, may lower healthcare costs does not 
establish that the Petitioner's endeavor will lower such costs to an extent rising to the level of national 
importance. The totality of the evidence does not establish that the endeavor has significant potential 
to generate the kinds of "substantial positive economic effects" envisioned by Dhanasar. Matter of 
Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 890. 
We acknowledge the documentation regarding the Petitioner's experience and qualifications and the 
recommendation letters commending her abilities and diligence. However, these relate to the second 
Dhanasar prong, which is concerned with the Petitioner's ability to advance her endeavor. They do 
not establish what impact her endeavor will have. 
The Petitioner has not demonstrated that her endeavor's impact will be nationally important. Because 
she has not established her eligibility under the first prong of the Dhanasar test, we need not address 
her eligibility under the other two prongs and hereby reserve those issues. See INS v. Bagamasbad, 
429 U.S. 24, 25 (1976) (stating that agencies are not required to make "purely advisory findings" on 
issues that are unnecessary to the ultimate decision); see also Matter of L-A-C-, 26 I&N Dec. 516, 
526 n.7 (BIA 2015) (declining to reach alternative issues on appeal where an applicant did not 
otherwise meet their burden of proof). The Petitioner has not established that she should be granted a 
waiver of the job offer requirement in the exercise of discretion. The petition will remain denied. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
4