dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Historical Architecture

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 6060323 
Appeal of Nebraska Service Center Decision 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: JAN. 31, 2020 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker (Advanced Degree, Exceptional Ability, National 
Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, a historical architect, seeks second preference 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 Nebraska Service Center denied the petition and a subsequent motion, 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. 
On appeal, the Petitioner submits additional documentation and a brief asserting that she is eligible for 
a national interest waiver. 
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. 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) 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 ofjob 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. 
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 I&N Dec. 884 (AAO 2016). 1 Dhanasar states that after a petitioner has established 
eligibility for EB-2 classification, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) may, as matter 
of discretion 2, 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. 
The first prong, substantial merit and national importance, focuses on the specific endeavor that the 
foreign national proposes to undertake. The endeavor's merit may be demonstrated in a range of areas 
such as business, entrepreneurialism, science, technology, culture, health, or education. In 
determining whether the proposed endeavor has national importance, we consider its potential 
prospective impact. 
The second prong shifts the focus from the proposed endeavor to the foreign national. To determine 
whether he or she is well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor, we consider factors including, 
but not limited to: the individual's education, skills, knowledge and record of success in related or 
similar efforts; a model or plan for future activities; any progress towards achieving the proposed 
endeavor; and the interest of potential customers, users, investors, or other relevant entities or 
individuals. 
The third prong requires the petitioner to demonstrate 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. In performing 
this analysis, USCIS may evaluate factors such as: whether, in light of the nature of the foreign 
national's qualifications or the proposed endeavor, it would be impractical either for the foreign 
national to secure a job offer or for the petitioner to obtain a labor certification; whether, even assuming 
1 In announcing this new rramework. we vacated our prior precedent decision, Matter of New York State Department of 
Transportation. 22 l&N Dec. 215 (Act. Assoc. Comm'r 1998) (NYSDOT). 
2 See also Poursina v. USC1S. No. 17-16579, 2019 WL 4051593 (Aug. 28, 2019) (finding USCIS' decision to grant or 
deny a national interest waiver to be discretionary in nature). 
2 
that other qualified U.S. workers are available, the United States would still benefit from the foreign 
national's contributions; and whether the national interest in the foreign national's contributions is 
sufficiently urgent to warrant forgoing the labor certification process. In each case, the factor(s) 
considered must, taken together, indicate 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. 3 
II. ANALYSIS 
The Director found that the Petitioner qualified 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 find that the Petitioner has not sufficiently demonstrated the national 
importance of her proposed endeavor under the first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework. 
The Petitioner indicated that she intends to continue her work aimed at restoring and preserving 
government and religious buildings. She stated that her ro osed work involves "serving as a 
historical consultant on building remodeling" for the.__ ______ ~ __ ___._,Council of America 
I , ~- The Petitioner further explained that she plans to advi'P"-L.--,__ _ _J on I I cultural 
elements for a number of their community centers including: .__ _ _. Food Education Center, 
Community Service Center, I I Faith Center and Museum, and more." The record includes a 
letter from! !president ofl l requesting the Petitioner's services "to 
~ concept design consultation for remodeling ofl ts buildings, with reference to 
L___J cultural elements, including coordination of implementation, liaising with su]pliers and 
contractors to ensure the quality of the end result; and also custom design ot1 _ exhibition 
displays." 4 1 , I further noted thatl I "owns five commercial buildings with 75,000 
square feet area, located inl I metropolitan area." 
In addition, the Petitioner provided a letter from I ,I a senior archeologist with the I I 
I I's Heritage and Historic Preservation Department, stating that the Petitioner and a colleague 
were under consideration for a project involving "the I I School that was built around 
1935." I I requested their assistance with "documentation of the three existing historical 
buildings, particularly building no. 302, which has architectural decorative works which we would 
like to preserve and document before demolishing it." She also sought "recommendations for reusing 
those materials which will be available after demolishing and reusing them for the construction of our 
new building." 
The record includes documentation about historic preservation from the National Institute of Building 
Sciences, a report from the National Trust for Historic Preservation discussing United States cultural 
heritage tourism, information about the Society of Architectural Historians from its website, and an 
article concerning cultural conservation from the American Institute for Conservation of Historic and 
Artistic Works. The Petitioner also submitted articles about the value of preserving! I cultural 
3 See Dhanasar, 26 T&N Dec. at 888-91, for elaboration on these three prongs. 
4 As the Petitioner is applying for a waiver of the job offer requirement, it is not necessary for her to have a job offer from 
a specific employer. However, we will consider information about her current and prospective positions to illustrate the 
capacity in which she intends to work in order to determine whether her proposed endeavor meets the requirements of the 
Dhanasar analytical framework. 
3 
artifacts, the key role of the arts in U.S. society, the creation of the National Endowment for the 
Humanities, and the economic impact associated with historic preservation. Additionally, the record 
contains an article about problems facing schools fonded by the U.S. Bureau of1 I Education, and 
information about the opening ofi ~s I I Center (Illinois) and its community programs. 
The Petitioner also provided language from the Historic Sites Act of 1935, a blog offering practical 
reasons for saving aging buildings, a webpage from the National Register of Historic Places displaying 
various dwellings, an article about the value of preserving historical buildings and making them 
sustainable, and information about the architectural historian profession. The record therefore shows 
that the Petitioner's proposed remodeling and preservation consulting work forl I andl I I I School has substantial merit. 
Furthermore, the Petitioner presented~le;;_;t..;_te;;_r..;;..s....;;.o_f..;;.su-',,J;;.."'-o.;;_rt..;_..;_w..;_h_i....;;.c_h-",she claims show the national importance 
of her proposed work. 5 For example, a retired real estate developer, asserted 
that the Petitioner "has an interest in American Culture" and that "the combination of her 
cultural sensitivity, architectural talent and project management skills has the potential to offer 
significant contributions to the restoration and preservation of imperiled historic America~ 
monuments." Likewise, I I an art history professor at University ofL_j 
stated that the Petitioner's "skill in recreating designs based on scholarly research ... has universal 
relevance and is something that can be applied in any given cultural environment. [The Petitioner] 
would therefore be able to contribute to preserving the cultural heritage of the United States of America 
an~ without doubt be an asset to the nation." Similarly,! I associate professor 
atL___JUniversity, contended that the Petitioner's projects "safeguard historical structures for the 
benefit of future generations" and are "of importance to the United States." 
In determining national importance, the relevant question is not the importance of the industry, field, 
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. In Dhanasar, we 
farther noted 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 
implications within a particular field." Id. 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. Although the 
Petitioner's documentation reflects her intention to provide valuable building remodeling and historical 
architecture consulting services for I I and I I School, she has not 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 find the record does not show that the Petitioner's 
proposed endeavor stands to sufficiently extend beyond her clientele to impact her field or U.S. 
cultural interests more broadly at a level commensurate with national importance. 
5 We discuss only a sampling of these letters, but have reviewed and considered each one. 
4 
Furthermore, the Petitioner has not demonstrated 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. Without sufficient information or evidence reTarding any projected U.S. economic 
impact or job creation attributable to her future work for I and I I School, the 
record does not show that benefits to the U.S. 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. Accordingly, the Petitioner's proposed 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. Further analysis of her eligibility under the second 
and third prongs outlined in Dhanasar, therefore, would serve no meaningful purpose. 
III. CONCLUSION 
As the Petitioner has not met the requisite first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework, we find 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. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
5