dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Home Health Care

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: Jul. 24, 2024 In Re: 31651126 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner seeks second preference immigrant classification (EB-2) as an advanced degree 
professional.' See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 203(b)(2), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(2) 
(2022). In a November 2022 statement, she indicated that she intends to come to the United States to 
create a business in the field of home health care. She also seeks a national interest waiver of the job 
offer requirement that is attached to this EB-2 immigrant classification. See 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 the Petitioner's eligibility for a national interest waiver. Specifically, the Director determined 
that the Petitioner failed to demonstrate her proposed endeavor is of national importance or that on 
balance, it would be beneficial to the United States to waive the required job offer, and thus of a labor 
certification. The matter is now before us on appeal. 8 C.F.R. § 103.3 (2023). 
The Petitioner bears the burden of proof to demonstrate eligibility by a preponderance of the evidence. 
Matter ofChawathe, 25 l&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 immigrant 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. 
Once a petitioner demonstrates eligibility as either a member of the professions holding an advanced 
degree or an individual of exceptional ability, 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 
1 The Petitioner submitted another EB-2 petition and national interest waiver in 2019. The Director of the Texas Service 
Center denied that petition and waiver request in February 2022. Subsequently, we dismissed the appeal in October 2022. 
Dhanasar, 26 T&N Dec. 884 (AAO 2016), provides the framework for adjudicating national interest 
waiver petitions. Matter ofDhanasar states that USCIS may, as matter of discretion,2 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 the proposed endeavor; and 
• On balance, waiving the requirements of a job offer and a labor certification would benefit the 
United States. 
Matter ofDhanasar, 26 T&N Dec. at 889-91. 
II. ANALYSIS 
The Director found that the Petitioner qualifies for the EB-2 classification as a member of the 
professions holding an advanced degree. See 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(i)(B) (2022). The Director based 
the determination on evidence of the Petitioner's bachelor's degree in nursing, which she obtained in 
Brazil, and letters from her former employers, discussing her at least 5 years of progressive post­
baccalaureate experience as a nurse. 3 Notwithstanding this finding, the Director concluded that she 
did not establish eligibility for a national interest waiver. Specifically, the Director explained in the 
denial that while the Petitioner has demonstrated the substantial merit of her proposed endeavor, she 
has not shown that "[her] proposed endeavor is of national importance," or 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." 
Upon de novo review, we agree with the Director's finding, concluding that the Petitioner's proposed 
endeavor does not satisfy the national importance element under the first prong of the Matter of 
Dhanasar framework. Id., 26 I&N Dec. at 889-90. If the Petitioner does not meet the first prong, the 
record is dispositive in finding that she is ineligible for the national interest waiver, and we need not 
address the second and third prongs under the Matter ofDhanasar framework. 
As explained in the Director's denial, the first prong - substantial merit and national importance -
focuses on the specific endeavor that the Petitioner proposes to undertake in the United States. In 
determining whether the proposed endeavor has national importance, we consider its potential 
prospective impact. Matter ofDhanasar, 26 l&N Dec. at 889. We noted in Matter ofDhanasar 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. 
2 See Poursina v. USCIS, 936 F. 3d 868, 870-76 (9th Cir. 2019) (finding USCIS' decision to grant or deny a national 
interest waiver to be discretionary in nature); 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 is discretionary in nature). 
3 On appeal, the Petitioner discusses extensively her educational and professional background. At issue is not whether she 
qualifies as a professional holding an advanced degree or whether she is well-positioned to advance the proposed endeavor; 
rather, at issue is whether her proposed endeavor has national importance. 
2 
In a November 2022 statement, the Petitioner stated that her "proposed endeavor will be to create a 
business in the field of Home Health Care that will offer the following services: general and follow­
up care for patients, personal care, palliative care, and emergency and urgent care for patients." She 
indicated that her business "will initially operate inl IFlorida" and will expand "to other areas 
whose demand for Home Health Care services is growing." In support of her petition, the Petitioner 
has offered a business plan, indicating that the business will provide services "in patients' /clients' own 
homes" and will be a franchise by third year of its operations. Pages 26 through 28 and 52 of the 
business plan provide that the business will hire eight employees, including one administrative 
assistant, three home health aides, two personal care aides, and two nursing assistants; will pay 
"$233,000.00 ... in wages annually"; will have "projected revenue of $3,951,187.20 for [the first] 5 
years"; and will "creat[e]/maintain[] more than 54 indirect jobs." The business plan also notes that 
industry studies and reports have confirmed "excellent expectations for the intense and constant 
revenue growth for the Home Care Providers sector" and "relevance and excellent expectations for 
the humanized care sector at home." 
In support of her petition, the Petitioner has presented recommendation letters from individuals who 
have worked with her and who are knowledgeable about her abilities. For example, a November 2022 
letter from a medical professional at ___________ in Brazil provides that the 
Petitioner has "show[n] an extensive capacity for knowledge of human behavior and performance" 
and is "qualified to work as a nurse and entrepreneur." A November 2022 letter from a plastic surgeon 
in Brazil "attest[s] to [the Petitioner's] skills in monitoring the patient's condition" and states that "her 
technical knowledge of nursing was always remarkable." A November 2022 letter from a nurse at 
_______ in Brazil indicates that the Petitioner "is a professional with rare and above 
average talent, who will make a difference anywhere in the United States." 
The recommendation letters in the record all praise the Petitioner's knowledge and ability. As 
explained in the Director's denial, under the second prong of the Matter of Dhanasar framework, 
USCIS considers factors including "the [Petitioner'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." See id., 26 I&N Dec. at 890. At issue, however, is whether the 
Petitioner has demonstrated the national importance of her proposed endeavor of establishing and 
operating a home health care business in the United States, the first prong of the Matter of Dhanasar 
framework. Id., 26 I&N Dec. at 889-90. The letters do not establish or discuss the national importance 
of the proposed endeavor. 
The record also includes a November 2022 letter from a professor at the 
I claiming that the Petitioner has satisfied the first prong of the Matter of Dhanasar 
framework. See id., 26 T&N Dec. at 889-90. He reached this conclusion because the Petitioner's 
proposed endeavor involves a business that is "in the home health aide market," industry studies and 
reports have predicted a high demand for home aide services, the Petitioner's business will "hire a 
team of qualified professionals ... with estimated annual payroll costs of $233,000," and the Petitioner 
"has significant potential to teach and train other U.S. professionals in the field." 
3 
I 
The evidence, including the Petitioner's statement, the business plan, and recommendation letters, 
confirms that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor is in an important field. As such, the Director 
concluded that she has demonstrated the substantial merit of her proposed endeavor. However, as 
explained, the relevant question is not the importance of a particular field in which the Petitioner will 
work; instead, to satisfy the first prong of the Matter of Dhanasar framework, the Petitioner must 
demonstrate that "the specific endeavor that [she] proposes to undertake" in the United States has 
national importance. Id., 26 I&N Dec. at 889-90. The record does not demonstrate that her proposed 
endeavor of establishing and operating a home health care business "has national or . . . global 
implications within a particular field, such as those resulting from certain improved manufacturing 
processes or medical advances." Id. at 889. Additionally, the record does not show that her proposed 
endeavor stands to sufficiently extend beyond her potential patients or clients, to impact the field or 
any other industries or the U.S. economy more broadly at a level commensurate with national 
importance. See Matter of Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 893 ( concluding 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). 
Moreover, as the Director noted in the denial, the record "does not demonstrate that the [proposed] 
endeavor would generate a significant economic benefit to the United States or to any of the cities or 
states it would operate in through employment levels, business activity, or trade, such that it would 
rise to the level of national importance." The Petitioner claims that her business will hire eight 
employees and has the potential to create "more than 54 indirect jobs." She also alleges that her 
business will pay $233,000 in wages annually and has the potential to have a total revenue of 
$3,951,187.20 within first five years ofits operations. She, however, has not established the business's 
"significant potential to employ U.S. workers or [that it] has other substantial positive economic 
effects, particularly in an economically depressed area." Matter of Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 890. 
Specifically, according to pages 15 and 16 of the business plan, "the number of people employed in 
the Home Health Services Industry Group has been growing at a rate of 1.52%, from 1.35 million in 
2019 to 1.37 million in 2020" and that "U.S. revenue [for the home health services sector] is projected 
to be approximately $100 billion in 2024." This information, which reveals the industry's substantial 
size, does not support the Petitioner's claim that her proposed endeavor, including its potential 
employment and economic effects, will likely have "national or ... global implications within [the] 
particular field." Id. at 889. 
Accordingly, we find that the Petitioner has not satisfied the first prong of the Matter of Dhanasar 
framework, and she has not demonstrated eligibility for a national interest waiver. As the identified 
reasons for dismissal are dispositive of the Petitioner's appeal, we decline to reach and hereby reserve 
remaining arguments concerning eligibility under the Matter of Dhanasar framework. See INS v. 
Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. 24, 25 (1976) (stating that "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 I&N Dec. 516, 526 n. 7 (BIA 2015) ( declining to reach alternative issues on appeal where 
an applicant is otherwise ineligible). 
4 
III. CONCLUSION 
As the Petitioner has not met the requisite first prong of the Matter ofDhanasar 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. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
5