dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Information Technology

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: WLY 18, 2023 In Re: 27521067 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner seeks classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree. 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 that the Petitioner 
had not established 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 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. 
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 l&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 contribute my expertise as a [s]olution 
[a]rchitect to highly complex projects." Although the Petitioner did not specify the type of solution 
he proposes to architect or for whom, he clarified that a solution architect is a synonym for a computer 
software developer. The Petitioner also paraphrased information from the U.S. Department of Labor's 
(DOL) Occupational Outlook Handbook (Handbook), submitted in support of the petition: "software 
developers create computer applications that allow users to complete specific tasks, as well as the 
underlying systems that allow devices to operate and control networks." 1 The Petitioner also stated 
that his proposed endeavor "can make a huge contribution to the development of this sector of the 
economy both within one company and for the United States as a whole," although he did not elaborate 
on what the proposed endeavor would contribute, how it would do so, the consequences of the 
contribution, and other such details about the proposed endeavor. 
In response to the Director's request for evidence (RFE), the Petitioner described the proposed 
endeavor as a plan "to work as an IT [ s ]pecialist/[ s ]olution [ a ]rchitect and develop the field." 
However, similar to his initial description of the proposed endeavor, he did not elaborate on the type 
of solution he proposes to architect or for whom. Instead, the Petitioner asserted that the proposed 
endeavor has national importance because the National Science and Technology Council included the 
generalized field of "advanced computing into the Critical and Emerging Technologies List that are 
of particular importance to the national security of the United States." The Petitioner also referenced 
publications regarding the general information technology industry that "suggest that while the 
demand for technology remained high in 2022, and will likely continue to be elevated in 2023, skilled 
IT workers will be hard to find and difficult to keep." 
The Director found that the record "does not articulate the [Petitioner's] particular plan for working 
as a solution architect or software developer at a level commensurate with national importance." The 
1 The Handbook is an authoritative source on the duties and educational requirements of the wide variety of occupations 
that it addresses. The information in the record from the Handbook states, in relevant pmt, "Software developers create 
the computer applications that allow users to do specific tasks and the underlying systems that run the devices or control 
networks." 
2 
Director observed that the Petitioner's statements regarding his proposed endeavor are "vague with 
respect to his actual employment plans in the United States. For example, the evidence does not 
indicate whether the [Petitioner] intends to work for a U.S. company or be self-employed." The 
Director acknowledged, however, that the record contains an undated job offer letter to the Petitioner 
from I Ifor the position of "IT specialist." The Director farther 
observed that "the [P]etitioner failed to provide evidence to demonstrate the potential prospective 
impact of [his] particular proposed endeavor." The Director also acknowledged generalized 
publications in the record but observed that they "are generic in nature and do not reference the 
[Petitioner], his prospective employer, or the proposed endeavor." Considering the record in its 
entirety, the Director concluded that the Petitioner did not establish the proposed endeavor has national 
importance. The Director farther concluded that the record satisfies the second Dhanasar prong but 
not the third. See Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 888-91, for elaboration on these three prongs. 
On appeal, the Petitioner asserts that "[t]he nine-page document included with [the Petitioner's] 1-140 
exhaustively describes [his] proposed endeavor, which is the work as a IT Specialist and Computer 
System Architect within the United States, improving the stability and security of US computer 
systems [sic]." The Petitioner also references information submitted in response to the Director's RFE 
that "attest[] to the urgent demand for these kinds of services." The Petitioner farther asserts that his 
proposed endeavor "will help make the digital infrastructure of the United States more secure, which 
will have an economic impact much broader than can be measured in terms of job creation." The 
Petitioner also asserts that the Director "erred in failing to give due weight to [the Petitioner's] degree 
and expertise in a STEM and CET field," again referencing the National Science and Technology 
information addressed in the RFE response. 
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. 
We first note that the Petitioner's assertion that the Director "erred in failing to give due weight to [the 
Petitioner's] degree and expertise in a STEM and CET field," particularly as applied to the first 
Dhanasar prong, is misplaced. "With respect to the first [Dhanasar] prong, as in all cases, the 
evidence must demonstrate that a STEM endeavor has both substantial merit and national importance." 
See 6 USCIS Policy Manual F.5(D)(2), https://www.uscis.gov/policymanual. A STEM endeavor that 
is not indicative of an impact in the particular field of STEM more broadly would not establish its 
national importance. See id. Specifically, a computer software developer-or a synonymous "solution 
architect"-endeavor that is not indicative of an impact in the field of computer software development 
more broadly would not establish its national importance. See id. Therefore, whether the proposed 
endeavor is in a STEM field or is listed on the DHS STEM Designated Degree Program List are not 
dispositive-the Petitioner must still establish that the proposed endeavor would have an impact in the 
field of STEM more broadly or have broader implications, such as "significant potential to employ 
U.S. workers or has other substantial positive economic effects, particularly in an economically 
3 
depressed area." See id.; see also Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889-90. Moreover, the Petitioner's 
reliance on his academic history as applied to the first Dhanasar prong is misplaced because academic 
history is material to the second Dhanasar prong-whether an individual is well positioned to advance 
a proposed endeavor-but it is immaterial to the first prong-whether the specific proposed endeavor 
will have national or even global implications within a particular field, or broader implications, such 
as substantial positive economic effects. See id. at 888-91. 
Next, contrary to the Petitioner's assertions on appeal, neither the initial filing nor the RFE response 
"exhaustively describes [the Petitioner's] proposed endeavor." Rather, as discussed above, the nine­
page document the Petitioner references on appeal paraphrases generalized information from the 
Handbook about what workers in the computer software developer occupational category do, it 
discusses generalized articles about the software development industry, and it summarizes the 
Petitioner's prior academic history and experience. Although the Petitioner stated in the referenced 
nine-page document that his proposed endeavor "can make a huge contribution to the development of 
this sector of the economy both within one company and for the United States as a whole," he did not 
elaborate on what the proposed endeavor would contribute, how it would do so, the consequences of 
the contribution, and other such details about the proposed endeavor and its potential for broader 
implications or substantial positive economic effects. See id. at 889-90. Likewise, the Petitioner's 
RFE response did not provide details about his proposed endeavor, generally stating instead that he 
intends to "develop the field." The Director's observation that the Petitioner's statements regarding 
his proposed endeavor are "vague with respect to his actual employment plans in the United States" 
is accurate. Although the record contains an undated employment offer letter, noted by the Director, 
the Petitioner did not state prior to the decision or on appeal that his proposed endeavor would entail 
working for that employer, being self-employed, or working for any other particular employer. 
Without more information regarding what software the Petitioner would develop and for whom he 
would develop it, the record does not establish that the proposed endeavor will have "national or even 
global implications within a particular field, such as those resulting from certain improved 
manufacturing processes or medical advances" or broader implications, such as "significant potential 
to employ U.S. workers or ... other substantial positive economic effects, particularly in an 
economically depressed area." Id. Thus, the record does not establish the proposed endeavor has 
national importance. 
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 or 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). Furthermore, we reserve our opinion regarding whether the record 
contains sufficient information to support the Director's conclusion that the proposed endeavor has 
substantial merit, as required by the first Dhanasar prong. See id. 
4 
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. 
5