dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Industrial Engineering

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: APR. 02, 2024 In Re: 30644119 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, an industrial engineer, 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. § 1153(b)(2). 
The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the Petitioner qualifies 
for classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree, but did not establish 
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 pursuant to 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 Christo 's, Inc., 26 l&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 a member of the professions holding an advanced 
degree or an individual of exceptional ability in the sciences, arts, or business. Section 203(b )(2)(B)(i) 
of the Act. 
If a petitioner demonstrates eligibility for the underlying EB-2 classification, 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 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, grant a national interest waiver if the 
petitioner demonstrates that: 1 
1 See also Flores v. Garland, 72 F.4th 85, 88 (5th Cir. 2023) (joining the Ninth, Eleventh, and D.C. Circuit Courts (and 
• 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. 
II. ANALYSIS 
The Director concluded that the Petitioner qualifies as a member of the professions holding an advanced 
degree and the record supports that determination. The remaining issue 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. 
The Director determined that the Petitioner established the substantial merit of his proposed endeavor 
and that he is well-positioned to advance it. However, the Director concluded he did not establish the 
proposed endeavor's national importance and that, on balance, it would benefit the United States to 
waive the job offer requirement. 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. While we do not discuss each piece of evidence individually, 
we have considered all relevant evidence in reaching this determination. 
A. Proposed Endeavor 
At the time of filing, the Petitioner provided evidence of his academic qualifications in industrial 
engineering, production, and international logistics. His resume highlights his professional experience in 
various fields. Most recently, he worked as a crew control analyst and operational services coordinator 
for a Colombian airline, from 2014 until 2022. In an accompanying "professional biography," the 
Petitioner stated that he "could contribute positively and significant[ly] not only in the aviation sector but 
in any productive and operational sector." However, other than identifying his intended occupation as 
"industrial engineer," he did not further discuss his intentions or identify the specific proposed endeavor 
he plans to undertake in the United States. 
In response to a request for evidence, the Petitioner submitted a "business plan" indicating that he intends 
"to provide world-class process improvement and business consulting services to companies of all sizes, 
operating in various industries, that need assistance in achieving growth, increasing efficiency and 
profitability, and improving internal processes." The plan indicates he would primarily focus on the 
aviation industry, "but will also provide consulting services to companies operating in other sectors like 
retail, food production and manufacturing." The Petitioner clarified he would initially seek employment 
in one of these "target sectors" and would start providing services as an independent consultant after 
gaining recognition for his process improvement work. The submitted plan includes a market overview 
of the management consulting industry and seeks to explain the need for the Petitioner's services in the 
airline transportation and manufacturing sectors, and his potential contributions to the United States. 
Third in an unpublished decision) in concluding that USCIS' decision to grant or deny a national interest waiver to be 
discretionary in nature). 
2 
B. Substantial Merit and National Importance 
The first prong of the Dhanasar framework, substantial merit and national importance, focuses on the 
specific endeavor that the individual 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. Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. 
In the decision denying the petition, the Director concluded that the evidence was sufficient to show 
that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor is of substantial merit. The Petitioner submitted evidence 
regarding the management consulting industry, challenges facing the U.S. airline and manufacturing 
industries, and the importance of small businesses to the U.S. economy. We agree that the Petitioner's 
plan to offer consulting services to these targeted industries through his own business has substantial 
merit. 
Turning to the national importance of the Petitioner's proposed endeavor, the Director determined that 
the Petitioner had not established how his proposed consulting business would have broader 
implications, either in the consulting field or in the industries he intends to serve as an independent 
consultant. The Director further concluded that the Petitioner did not establish how his proposed 
endeavor would have substantial economic impacts commensurate with national importance. 
On appeal, the Petitioner submits additional evidence and repeats his previous claim that, by working 
as a business consultant specializing in process improvement, he will increase operational efficiencies 
across various industries, with direct impacts on industries that are considered nationally important 
including airline transportation, manufacturing, and small business enterprises. The Petitioner also 
stresses that because he will be starting his own company, the direct and indirect economic impact of 
his work will not be limited to a single employer and its clients. Finally, he emphasizes that his 
proposed services to the manufacturing industry are in a STEM area that the U.S. government has 
identified as being important to U.S. competitiveness and should be weighed favorably based on 
guidance provided in the USCIS Policy Manual. 
In determining national importance, the relevant question is not the importance of the field, industry, 
or profession in which the individual will work; instead, we focus on the "the specific endeavor that 
the foreign national proposes to undertake." Matter of Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. Whether a 
proposed endeavor has national importance depends on its "potential prospective impact." Endeavors 
with national or global implications within a particular field - such as those introducing improved 
manufacturing processes or medical advances - may have national importance. Id. Further "[aa ]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. We will also consider factors such as whether there is 
evidence that a proposed endeavor has the potential to broadly enhance societal welfare or whether it 
impacts a matter that a government entity has described as having national importance or is the subject 
of national initiatives. 
The Petitioner claims that his proposed endeavor will have substantial positive economic effects that 
will be direct, based on his plans to start his own consulting business, as well as indirect effects, based 
3 
on the positive impact he will have on clients that rely on his consulting services. Although the 
Petitioner submitted a document he characterizes as a "business plan," it does not include any 
projections related to his future business' potential for job creation and revenue. For example, despite 
stating that his endeavor stands to generate direct and indirect jobs for U.S. workers, the business plan 
does not identify the number or types ofjobs that will be created, the location of these jobs, the wages 
of these workers, or other details. Further, he does not state that he will operate his business in an 
economically depressed area. Therefore, while the Petitioner generally suggests that his company has 
growth potential, he has not presented evidence indicating that the benefits to the regional or national 
economy resulting from his undertaking would reach the level of "substantial positive economic 
effects" contemplated by Dhanasar, based on employment levels, tax revenue, or business activity. 
26 I&N Dec. at 890. 
Rather, most of the Petitioner's claims regarding the potential economic effects of his proposed 
endeavor relate to the broad economic impact of the industries in which he intends to provide 
consulting services. For example, he emphasizes that management consulting is a growing industry 
with $329.9 billion in revenue in 2023, that the air transport industry accounts for 4.2 percent of the 
United States GDP, that small business enterprises are "the backbone of the U.S. economy," and that 
manufacturing is a leading industry in terms of direct and indirect job creation. The Petitioner 
maintains that his proposed consulting work with clients in these industries will result in cost savings 
and increased productivity and efficiency, with "ripple effects" that lead to increased revenue and 
overall growth. He therefore claims his work will contribute, albeit indirectly, to "a healthier business 
ecosystem," and increase the amount of tax revenue available to provide public services for the benefit 
of all Americans. 
The record supports that the air transport, manufacturing, and consulting industries are important to 
the U.S. economy. However, the burden is on the Petitioner to establish that the economic effects of 
his specific proposed endeavor are "substantial"; he cannot rely on industry-wide economic data to 
meet the national importance element of Dhanasar's first prong. He did not provide specific plans, 
projections, or calculations in support of his broad claims regarding the potential indirect economic 
effects of his proposed endeavor. Nor did he otherwise provide an evidentiary basis to demonstrate 
that his work will, for example, result in a "healthier business ecosystem" in the United States. While 
any business activity has the potential to positively impact the economy, the record does not 
demonstrate how the Petitioner's independent consulting business could generate such significant 
indirect economic activity that it would rise to the level of "substantial positive economic effects." 
Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 890. 
The Petitioner generally indicates that he will be able to optimize and automate certain internal 
processes for clients in various industries, but he does not claim, for example, that he intends to 
introduce innovative methods or novel advancements that would have potential industry-wide 
implications. 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. Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 893. Here, the 
record similarly does not establish that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor to work as an independent 
consultant will for example, decrease the incidence of flight delays among U.S. airlines, improve U.S. 
manufacturing practices, or advance the management consulting industry at a scale that is 
commensurate with national importance. As noted, the Petitioner's business plan offers little insight 
4 
into the anticipated size and scope of his future consulting business, and overall, the record does not 
support his claim that he is poised to have a "profound impact" on multiple industries and the health 
of the U.S. economy. 
As an example of his proposed endeavor's potential impact, the Petitioner submits a letter from a 
prospective U.S. client that assembles, prepares, and manages food stands at large festivals and events. 
The potential client indicates its interest in retaining the Petitioner's consulting services to "further 
grow our company, improve our internal processes, and increase our efficiency and profitability." The 
letter mentions the Petitioner's "unique and tailored approach" noting that he will be analyzing their 
existing processes and implementing methods designed to improve the company's performance. 
Neither this letter nor other evidence in the record elaborates on the Petitioner's "unique" approach to 
management consulting or optimizing internal processes; in fact, he has not previously worked as a 
consultant or worked in this prospective client's industry. 
Although the Petitioner places considerable emphasis on the importance of the consulting services he 
intends to provide to the air transport and manufacturing industries, he has not identified any potential 
clients in those sectors. As noted, although the Petitioner submitted a plan for his proposed endeavor, 
it offers no information about the number or types of clients he could potentially and realistically target 
as an independent consultant. Therefore, he has not established that his work as an independent 
consultant is more likely than not to impact one of these targeted industries, or any other industry, on 
a level with implications that rise to the level of national importance. Matter of Chawathe, 19 I&N 
Dec. at 376 (explaining that the "preponderance of the evidence" standard requires petitioners to 
submit relevant, probative, and credible evidence to show the fact to be proven is "probably" true). 
The Petitioner claims on appeal that his proposal to offer consulting services to clients in the 
manufacturing sector would be of national importance in promoting U.S. competitiveness in a STEM 
field. He emphasizes that "economic resilience" in manufacturing was highlighted in the 
Memorandum on Research and Development Priorities for President Biden's 2022 budget, issued 
jointly by the Directors of the Office of Science and Technology Policy and Office of Management 
and Budget. The memorandum states that "investments in economic resilience should emphasize 
technologies that ensure safe, clean and reliable access to critical products, materials and minerals, 
including new manufacturing and biomanufacturing processes that can cost-effectively produce key 
goods on demand." 
USCIS recognizes the importance of progress in STEM fields and the essential role of persons with 
advanced STEM degrees in fostering this progress, especially in focused critical and emerging 
technologies, or other STEM areas important to U.S. competitiveness or national security. See 
generally 6 USCIS Policy Manual F.5(D)(2), https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual. With respect to 
the first prong of the Dhanasar framework, we acknowledge that proposed endeavors that aim to 
advance STEM technologies and research not only have substantial merit in relation to U.S. science 
and technology interests but may also have sufficiently broad potential implications to demonstrate 
national importance. The Petitioner's proposed endeavor, as described in the record, does not clearly 
involve the research and advancement of STEM technologies. The Petitioner, whose employment 
history does not include specific experience in product manufacturing, indicates that he intends to 
eventually work as an independent consultant and, in this capacity, may serve clients in the 
manufacturing sector. However, he does not sufficiently articulate how the scope of his work as an 
5 
independent consultant would meaningfully contribute to and have broad implications for U.S. 
technology leadership and competitiveness in manufacturing. For these reasons, the Petitioner did not 
demonstrate the national importance of his proposed endeavor based on its potential connection to a 
STEM field. 
Finally, to illustrate the potential impact of his proposed endeavor, the Petitioner points to his academic 
and professional qualifications and his past employment experience, with an emphasis on his prior 
work in the air transport industry. We reviewed his statements and several reference letters from his 
prior employers and business contacts. The authors of the letters praise the Petitioner's expertise, 
professionalism, personal attributes, and past achievements. However, they do not discuss his specific 
proposed endeavor or speak to the potential broader implications of his work. As such, the letters are 
not probative of the Petitioner's eligibility under the first prong of Dhanasar. Furthermore, we note 
that the Petitioner's knowledge, skills, education, and experience are considerations under Dhanasar's 
second prong, which "shifts the focus from the proposed endeavor to the foreign national." 26 I&N 
Dec at 890. The issue under the first prong is whether the Petitioner has demonstrated the national 
importance of his proposed endeavor. 
For the reasons stated above, we conclude that the Petitioner has not shown that his proposed has 
national importance, and he therefore has not met the first prong of the Dhanasar analytical 
framework. 
A petitioner must meet all three prongs of the Dhanasar analytical framework to establish eligibility 
for a national interest waiver. Since the identified basis for denial is dispositive of the Petitioner's 
appeal, we decline to reach and hereby reserve discussion ofDhanasar's second and third prongs. 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 ofL-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). 
III. CONCLUSION 
Because 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. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
6