dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Industrial Instrumentation

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: NOV. 29, 2023 In Re: 28467173 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, an industrial instrumentation specialist, seeks classification as a member of the 
professions holding an advanced degree or, in the alternative, as an individual of exceptional ability 
in the sciences, arts or business. See 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. See section 203(b )(2)(B)(i) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 
§ 1153(b )(2)(B)(i). 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 Petitioner qualified 
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. 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 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 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. 
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). Dhanasar states that, after a petitioner has established 
eligibility for EB-2 classification, USCIS may, as a matter of discretion, grant a national interest 
waiver if the petitioner demonstrates: (1) that the noncitizen's proposed endeavor has both substantial 
merit and national importance; (2) that the noncitizen 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 
noncitizen 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. 
See Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 888-91, for elaboration on these three prongs. 
II. ANALYSIS 
The Director found that the Petitioner qualifies 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 of a labor certification, would be in the national interest. 
For the reasons discussed below, the Petitioner has not established that a waiver of the requirement of 
a job offer is warranted. 
Initially, the Petitioner described the endeavor as a plan "to advance his career as an Industrial 
Instrumentation Specialist and by doing so, develop implement, and advise using his in-depth 
knowledge acquired through years of experience in the field." The Petitioner farther stated that he 
will "make his services available to small and large businesses belonging to both the private and public 
sector in the United States." The Petitioner added that his "expert and unique skills will be crucial for 
the success of companies that need to improve quality, increase productivity and efficiency, automate 
productions processes, and reduce costs and losses in the United States." 
In response to the Director's request for (RFE), the Petitioner stated his work will directly impact the 
instrumentation technical field and the U.S. economy since he will work with "electrical safety and 
industrial machinery equipment, maintenance of hydraulic equipment aimed at the preventive and 
corrective maintenance market in this sector, including reforms, reconditioning, and adjustments of 
industrial hydraulic tools, and electrical maintenance and programming of ABB, IRB, KRCT4 robots." 
The Petitioner farther stated he will provide his services in instrumentation process and maintenance 
in the oil and gas industry. The Petitioner indicated his proposed endeavor will prove to be of national 
importance through the "availability of a vast number of sophisticated instruments which will 
correspondingly lead to improved product quality and decreased plant shutdown - which planned or 
unplanned, always have a significant impact on manufacturing schedules, consumer accessibility, 
inflated prices, and more." Further, the Petitioner stated that due to his high qualifications and 
extensive experience as an instrumentation technician, he will improve working conditions for 
American workers in the oil and gas industry since he will decrease work-related accidents. The 
Petitioner asserts that as an instrumentation technician, he will create the opportunity to raise the standard 
of living in the United States and the world since his work will help the manufacturing companies that 
make capital goods. 
The Director determined the Petitioner demonstrated the proposed endeavor's substantial merit but not 
its national importance. On appeal, the Petitioner copies sections of his response to the Director's RFE 
2 
into his appeal, essentially repeating the same arguments rejected by the Director. The Petitioner again 
summarizes his prior employment experience and qualifications, and he asserts that his past 
contributions and achievements demonstrate that he has made and continues to make contributions of 
significant impact. The Petitioner reiterates the general duties he has and will perform as an 
instrumentation technician. Since the appeal brief is for the most part identical to the response to the 
RFE, the Petitioner did not provide evidence to overcome the Director's concerns as stated in the denial. 
In determining national importance, the relevant question is not the importance of the industry, field, 
or profession in which an individual will work; instead, to assess national importance, we focus on the 
"specific endeavor that the [noncitizen] proposes to undertake." See Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. 
Dhanasar provided examples of endeavors that may have national importance, as required by the first 
prong, having "national or even global implications within a particular field, such as those resulting 
from certain improved manufacturing processes or medical advances" and endeavors that have broader 
implications, such as "significant potential to employ U.S. workers or has other substantial positive 
economic effects, particularly in an economically depressed area." Id. at 889-90. 
As described in the record, the proposed endeavor appears to benefit the Petitioner's employer and its 
clients; however, it does not appear to have broader implications or substantial positive economic 
effects indicative of national importance. See Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889-90. Specifically, the 
Petitioner addresses maximizing a company's profit, providing his services in field instrumentation to 
ensure compliance with safety and environmental regulations, and generally help the manufacturing 
industry which in tum will improve the U.S. economy; however, the record does not establish with 
specific, probative information how the Petitioner's instrumentation technician endeavor would have 
broader implications beyond his employer's and its clients' profits, customer service, and work safety, 
etc. See id. Although the Petitioner asserts that his endeavor will enhance job creation and that the 
companies he provides services to will be better positioned to create job opportunities for U.S. 
employees, the record does not establish with probative information the types of jobs his endeavor 
may create, the number of workers his endeavor may cause to be employed, where those workers will 
work, and other details that may establish the endeavor has "significant potential to employ U.S. 
workers or has other substantial positive economic effects, particularly in an economically depressed 
area." See id. Additionally, although the Petitioner asserts that the proposed endeavor will assist with 
the manufacturing of capital goods and create the opportunity to raise the standard of living for the 
United States and the world, the Petitioner does not explain specifically how his endeavor will broadly 
affect the manufacturing industry and establish that the proposed endeavor would have broader 
implications indicative of national importance. See id. 
On appeal, the Petitioner goes on to state that USCIS "has consistently stated that one way to estimate 
the prospective impact of one's work is by evaluating the individual's past achievements." We first 
note that he does not support this statement with citations to published decisions or references to policy 
documents. Second, the Petitioner's references to his prior employment experience, qualifications, 
and past contributions and achievements are misplaced in the context of the first Dhanasar prong. 
Although an individual's experience, qualifications, contributions, and achievements are material to 
the second Dhanasar prong-whether an individual is well positioned to advance a proposed 
endeavor-they are immaterial to the first Dhanasar prong-whether a specific, prospective, proposed 
endeavor has both substantial merit and national importance. See id. at 888-91. Relatedly, the 
Petitioner's references to the demand for manufacturing positions, and the benefits of hiring 
3 
technicians to increase the need for manufacturing jobs are misplaced. As discussed above, in 
determining national importance, the relevant question is not the importance of the industry, field, or 
profession in which an individual will work; instead, to assess national importance, we focus on the 
"specific endeavor that the [noncitizen] proposes to undertake." See id. at 889. 
In summation, the Petitioner has not established that the proposed endeavor has national importance, 
as required by the first Dhanasar prong; therefore, he is not eligible for a national interest waiver. We 
reserve our opinion regarding whether the record satisfies the second and third Dhanasar prong. See 
INS v. Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. 24, 25 (1976) ("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 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 
As the Petitioner has not met the requisite first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework, we 
conclude that the Petitioner has not established eligibility for, or otherwise merits, a national interest 
waiver as a matter of discretion. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
4