dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Information Technology

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: JULY 31, 2024 In Re: 32980217 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, an information technology (IT) project manager and entrepreneur, 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 
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 the Petitioner qualified for 
EB-2 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 qualify for EB-2 visa classification, a petitioner must establish they are an advanced degree 
professional or an individual of exceptional ability in the sciences, arts, or business. Section 
203(b )(2)(A) 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 l&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, 1 grant a national interest waiver if 
the petitioner demonstrates that: 
1 See 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in an unpublished decision) in concluding that USCIS ' decision to grant or deny a national interest waiver is discretionary 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). 
• 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. 
Id. 
II. ANALYSIS 
The Petitioner submitted a business plan for a consulting, advisory and training business in project 
management focusing on information technology, implementation, and systems management. The 
plan states the business will be a limited liability company located in the I 
Florida metropolitan area. 
The Director determined that the Petitioner qualified for EB-2 classification as a member of the 
professions holding an advanced degree. We agree. The only issue on appeal is whether he qualifies 
for and merits a waiver of the job offer requirement in the national interest. 
A. Substantial Merit and National Importance 
1. Substantial Merit 
The first Dhanasar prong, substantial merit and national importance, focuses on the specific endeavor 
that the individual proposes to undertake. Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. The endeavor's merit may 
be demonstrated in a range of areas such as business, entrepreneurialism, science, technology, culture, 
health, or education. Id. The Director determined the Petitioner established the substantial merit of 
his proposed endeavor. We agree. 
2. National Importance 
The Director concluded the Petitioner did not establish the national importance of his proposed 
endeavor. In determining whether the proposed endeavor has national importance, we consider its 
potential prospective impact. Id. This consideration may include whether the proposed endeavor has 
significant potential to employ U.S. workers (particularly in an economically depressed area), has 
other substantial positive economic effects, has national or even global implications within the field, 
or has other broader implications indicating national importance. Id. at 889-90. The Director 
determined the Petitioner did not establish that his proposed endeavor would have substantial positive 
economic effects or a broader impact on his field outside of his prospective company and clients. 
On appeal, the Petitioner claims the Director underestimated "the transformative economic impact" of 
the Petitioner's company, which his business plan shows is "poised to significantly catalyze local and 
national economic growth." The business plan projects the company will employ five individuals the 
first year increasing to 11 individuals in the fifth year and generate between 25 to 170 indirect jobs. 
The business plan discusses economically depressed areas in Florida and states "there are no strong 
obstacles to offering services and courses to the population of these regions," but does not indicate 
that it would employ any individuals in these regions. The business plan does not establish that the 
2 
projected direct employment of five to 11 people and indirect employment of 25 to 70 people shows 
a significant potential to employ United States workers in general or in an economically depressed 
area as the business plan states the management consulting industry in the United States generated 
1,853,364 jobs in 2021. The business plan also forecasts earning a final profit of-$9,845 the first year 
increasing to $488,843 in the fifth year. This projected profit does not indicate a substantial positive 
economic effect in the Petitioner's field as the business plan states that in 2021 the management 
consulting industry in the United States generated $253.1 billion in revenue. See id. at 890 ( discussing 
significant potential to employ United States workers and other substantial positive economic effects 
as indicative of national importance). 
The Petitioner also asserts the Director overlooked "the strategic significance" of the Petitioner's 
proposed endeavor, which will foster economic growth through entrepreneurship in technology and 
cybersecurity and will resonate with federal strategies to secure the nation's technological interests 
and infrastructure. The Petitioner submitted copies of the Executive Order on the Safe, Secure, and 
Trustworthy Development and Use of Artificial Intelligence and the 2022 National Security Strategy. 
However, our assessment of national importance does not focus on the importance of issues affecting 
a field in general, rather it "focuses on the specific endeavor that the foreign national proposes to 
undertake." Id. at 889. The Petitioner has not established that his proposed endeavor would extend 
beyond his company's individual clients to impact these national interests more broadly. See id. 
( explaining "we look for broader implications"). 
The Petitioner claims his proposed endeavor also has national importance because it aligns with the 
federal government's support of science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) education 
and workforce development. We recognize the importance of progress in STEM fields and the 
essential role that individuals with advanced STEM degrees have in fostering such progress. 6 USCIS 
Policy ManualF.5(D)(2), https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual/. However, "in all cases, the evidence 
must demonstrate that a STEM endeavor has both substantial merit and national importance." Id. 
Here, the Petitioner does not demonstrate how his proposed endeavor would impact STEM education 
and workforce development apart from his work for individual client businesses in a manner 
commensurate with national importance. 
The Petitioner asserts the Director did not give due regard to industry reports and articles he submitted 
which demonstrate the national importance of his proposed endeavor. The Petitioner submitted 
articles on the rising demand for information managers, the importance of information and 
communication technology in project management, high demand for IT workers in 2022, rising 
demand for information managers, U.S. startups founded by immigrants, immigrants and workforce 
development, immigrants creating jobs, immigrant workforce supporting millions of U.S. jobs, the 
importance of information technology, 2023 IT industry outlook, and U.S. need for talent to retain 
technology leadership. These articles attest to the importance of IT and the contributions of 
immigrants to the U.S. workforce, but again, our assessment of national importance does not focus on 
the importance of issues affecting a field or our nation in general, rather it "focuses on the specific 
endeavor that the foreign national proposes to undertake." Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. Here, 
none of the articles mention the Petitioner or address the potential prospective impact of his proposed 
endeavor. See id. (explaining we consider the proposed endeavor's potential prospective impact when 
assessing national importance). 
3 
The Petitioner also claims the Director did not adequately consider his letters of recommendation and 
evidence of his work in his field. The Petitioner submitted letters from colleagues praising his 
experience and skills and expressing confidence in his ability j° succeed in the future. For example, 
M-J-M- praises the Petitioner's project management at where he met deadlines and "delivered 
all components at a significantly lower cost." D-W- expresses gratitude for the Petitioner's project 
management supporting IT services for the The Petitioner also submitted 
letters from individuals and businesses interested in hiring him to perform IT project management. 
While they attest to his significant achievements, skills and experience, the letters do not specifically 
address his proposed endeavor and any impact it would have in his field. 
The Petitioner also submitted a letter from an expert expressing his opinion that the Petitioner qualifies 
for a national interest waiver. The expert states the Petitioner's proposed endeavor has national 
importance because his experience with the business environment and information technology services 
sector in Brazil would help U.S. companies doing or seeking to do business in Brazil, which is a "must 
play" market for U.S. multinational In his business plan, the Petitioner states his company 
will concentrate its marketing on the Florida area and does not discuss any intended focus 
on U.S. companies doing business in Brazil. The expert also does not specify how the Petitioner's 
work would extend beyond individual businesses to impact trade or other significant relations between 
Brazil and the United States. Cf id. at 892 (stating Dhanasar submitted probative expert letters 
describing the importance of his specific research as it relates to U.S. strategic interests). 
Letters from the Petitioner's colleagues and employers attest to his qualifications and contributions to 
the companies where he has worked, but do not discuss his proposed endeavor and any potential 
impact it would have on the field oflT project management. Their letters also do not indicate that the 
Petitioner's past or proposed accomplishments include any contributions to his field with national or 
even lobal im lications. The Petitioner submitted an excer t from a book he ublished entitled 
He did not submit evidence that his book has been cited by other IT project 
management professionals or has otherwise significantly contributed to his field. See id. at 889 
( discussing improved manufacturing processes or medical advances as examples of national or even 
global implications within a particular field). 
The Petitioner has not established that his proposed endeavor has significant potential to employ U.S. 
workers (particularly in an economically depressed area), would have other substantial positive 
economic effects, or national or even global implications within the field. 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, the record does not show that the 
Petitioner's proposed endeavor stands to sufficiently extend beyond his company's clients to impact 
his field more broadly in a manner indicative of national importance. 
C. The Remaining Dhanasar Prongs 
The Petitioner has not established the national importance of his specific proposed endeavor and he 
does not meet the first prong of the Dhanasar framework. As this issue is dispositive of the 
Petitioner's appeal, we decline to reach and hereby reserve determination of his eligibility under the 
second and third prongs of the Dhanasar framework. See INS v. Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. 24, 25 (1976) 
4 
( 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). 
III. CONCLUSION 
The 
Petitioner has not established the national importance of his proposed endeavor and does not meet 
the first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework. Consequently, he has not demonstrated that he 
is eligible for or merits a waiver of the job offer requirement in the national interest as a matter of 
discretion. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
5