dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Information Technology

U.S.Departmentof HomelandSecurity
U.s. CitizenshipandImmigrationServices
AdministrativeAppealsOflice (AAO)
20 MassachusettsAve.,N.W.,Ms 2090
Washington,DC 20529-2090
8, U.S.Citizenship
and Immigration
Services
DATE: DEC 2 0 2012 OFFICE:NEBRASKASERVICECENTER FILE:
IN RE: Petitioner:
Beneficiary:
PETITION: ImmigrantPetitionfor AlienWorkerasaMemberof theProfessionsHoldinganAdvanced
Degreeor anAlienof ExceptionalAbility Pursuantto Section203(b)(2)of theImmigration
andNationalityAct, 8 U.S.C.§ 1153(b)(2)
ONBEHALFOFPETITIONER:
INSTRUCTIONS:
Enclosedpleasefind thedecisionof theAdministrativeAppealsOffice in yourcase.All of thedocuments
relatedto this matterhavebeenreturnedto theofficethatoriginallydecidedyourcase.Pleasebeadvised
thatanyfurtherinquirythatyoumighthaveconcerningyourcasemustbemadeto thatoffice.
If you believe the AAO inappropriately applied the law in reaching its decision, or you have additional
information that you wish to have considered,you may file a motion to reconsideror a motion to reopenin
accordancewith the instructions on Form I-290B, Notice of Appeal or Motion, with a fee of $630. The
specificrequirementsfor filing sucha motioncanbe foundat 8 C.F.R.§ 103.5.Do not file any motion
directly with theAAO. Pleasebeawarethat8C.F.R.§ 103.5(a)(1)(i)requiresanymotionto befiledwithin
30daysof thedecisionthatthemotionseekstoreconsiderorreopen.
Thankyou,
RonRosenberg
ActingChief,AdministrativeAppealsOffice
www.uscis.gov
Page2
DISCUSSION: The Director,NebraskaServiceCenter,deniedthe employment-basedimmigrant
visapetition. Thematteris now beforethe AdministrativeAppealsOffice (AAO) on appeal. The
AAO will dismisstheappeal.
Thepetitionerseeksclassificationundersection203(b)(2)of theImmigrationandNationalityAct (the
Act), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(2),as a memberof the professionsholding an advanceddegree. The
petitionerseeksemploymentasa seniortechnicalanalyst. Thepetitionerassertsthat an exemption
fromtherequirementof ajob offer, andthusof a laborcertification,is in thenationalinterestof the
UnitedStates.Thedirectorfoundthatthe petitionerqualifiesfor classificationasa memberof the
professionsholding an advanceddegree,but that thepetitionerhasnot establishedthat an exemption
fromtherequirementof ajob offerwouldbein thenationalinterestoftheUnitedStates.
Onappeal,thepetitionersubmitsabrieffromcounselandcopiesof previouslysubmittedmaterials.
Section203(b)of theAct states,inpertinentpart:
(2) Aliens Who Are Membersof the ProfessionsHoldingAdvancedDegreesor Aliensof
ExceptionalAbility.-
(A) In General.- Visasshallbe madeavailable. . . to qualifiedimmigrantswho are
membersof the professionsholding advanceddegreesor their equivalentor who
becauseof theirexceptionalability in thesciences,arts,or business,will substantially
benefitprospectivelythenationaleconomy,culturalor educationalinterests,or welfare
of the UnitedStates,andwhoseservicesin thesciences,arts,professions,or business
aresoughtby anemployerin theUnited States.
(B) Waiverof JobOffer-
(i) . . . theAttomey Generalmay,whenthe Attomey Generaldeemsit to bein
thenationalinterest,waivetherequirementsof subparagraph(A) thatanalien's
servicesin the sciences,arts,professions,or businessbe soughtby anemployer
in theUnitedStates.
Thedirectordid not disputethat the petitionerqualifiesasa memberof the professionsholdingan
advanceddegree.Thesoleissuein contentioniswhetherthepetitionerhasestablishedthatawaiverof
thejob offer requirement,andthusa laborcertification,is in thenationalinterest.
Neitherthe statutenor the pertinentregulationsdefinethe term "nationalinterest." Additionally,
Congressdid not providea specificdefinitionof "in the nationalinterest." The Committeeon the
Judiciarymerelynotedin its reportto theSenatethatthecommitteehad"focusedonnationalinterest
by increasingthenumberandproportionof visasfor immigrantswhowouldbenefittheUnitedStates
economicallyandotherwise.. . ." S.Rep.No. 55, 101stCong.,1stSess.,11(1989). Supplementary
informationto regulationsimplementingthe ImmigrationAct of 1990,publishedat 56 Fed.Reg.
60897,60900(November29,1991),states:
Page3
The Service[now U.S. CitizenshipandImmigrationServices(USCIS)]believesit
appropriateto leavethe applicationof this test as flexible as possible,although
clearlyanalienseekingto meetthe [nationalinterest]standardmustmakeashowing
significantly above that necessaryto prove the "prospectivenational benefit"
[requiredof aliensseekingto qualify as"exceptional."] Theburdenwill restwith
thealiento establishthatexemptionfrom,or waiverof, thejob offer will be in the
nationalinterest.Eachcaseisto bejudgedon its ownmerits.
In re New YorkStateDept.of Transportation(NYSDOT),22 I&N Dec.215 (Act. Assoc.Comm'r
1998),hassetforthseveralfactorswhichmustbeconsideredwhenevaluatinga requestfor anational
interestwaiver. First, the petitionermust show that the alien seeksemploymentin an areaof
substantialintrinsicmerit. Next,thepetitionermustshowthattheproposedbenefitwill benationalin
scope. Finally,thepetitionerseekingthewaivermustestablishthatthe alienwill servethenational
interestto asubstantiallygreaterdegreethanwouldanavailableUnitedStatesworkerhavingthesame
minimumqualifications.
Whilethenationalinterestwaiverhingesonprospectivenationalbenefit,thepetitionermustestablish
that the alien's past recordjustifies projectionsof future benefit to the nationalinterest. The
petitioner'ssubjectiveassurancethat the alienwill, in the future,servethe nationalinterestcannot
sufficeto establishprospectivenationalbenefit. The intentionbehindthe term "prospective"is to
requirefuture contributionsby the alien, ratherthan to facilitatethe entry of an alien with no
demonstrableprior achievements,andwhosebenefitto the nationalinterestwouldthusbe entirely
speculative.
The AAO also notesthat the USCISregulationat 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2)defines"exceptional
ability" as"a degreeof expertisesignificantlyabovethatordinarilyencountered"in a givenareaof
endeavor. By statute,aliensof exceptionalability are generallysubjectto the job offer/labor
certificationrequirement;they are not exemptby virtue of their exceptionalability. Therefore,
whethera given alienseeksclassificationasanalienof exceptionalability, or asa memberof the
professionsholdinganadvanceddegree,thataliencannotqualify for awaiverjust by demonstrating
adegreeof expertisesignificantly abovethat ordinarily encounteredin his or herfield of expertise.
Thepetitionerfiledthe FormI-140petitionon September26,2011. In anaccompanyingstatement,
counselstated:"[The petitioner]hasaskedmeto assisthim [sic] in filing a petition. . . to enable
him continue[sic] his biomedicalresearchanddevelopa strongresearchprogramin the United
States." The petitioner is neither male nor a biomedical researcher,yet counsel,throughout the
five-page statement,repeatedlyused masculinepronounsand words such as "science" and
"research." Counselappearsto haveuseda largelyunmodifiedtemplatedocument,a conclusion
consistentwith repeatedappearancesof the phrase"Dr. Beneficiary"in placeof the petitioner's
actualname. (The petitionerdoesnot claim to hold a doctorate,) As a result,the introductory
statementcontainsno useful informationrelatingspecificallyto the petitioneror to her claimed
eligibility for thenationalinterestwaiver.
The petitioner identified no current or prospectiveemployeron the petition form or on the
accompanyingFormETA-750B,Statementof Qualificationsof Alien. A résumésubmittedwith the
petitionindicatedthatthepetitionerheldtwo positionsatthetimeof filing:
Page4
OX BACK OFFICE SOLUTIONS LAKELAND, FL
BusinessAnalyst January2011- Present
• Elicit project requirementsfrom stake-holdersand businessowners for the
developmentof proprietary(SaaS)webapplications
• Facilitatejoint application& rapidapplicationdevelopment(JAD/RAD)workshops
& meetings
• Createsupport,trainingandhelpdocumentations
• Designtestplanandtestcasesfor UserAcceptanceTesting
• Developbusinessandfunctionalrequirements(BRD/FRD)fortheapplication.
• DesigninteractiveUI prototypeusingMS expressionblendto demonstratethe
applicationinteractionto developersandstake-holders
• ProducehighqualityUI elementsandensureaestheticqualityof interfaces
• Validate technical designs created by IT developers against functional
specificationsto ensurethere are no gaps betweenthe applicationand the
requirements
EFUSIONLLC CHICAGO,IL
Founder/President September2010- Present
• Developand executebusinessstrategiesto enableclients[to] unlock their full
potentialby leveragingwebtechnology.
• Educatesmall businessesand individuals on the benefits of creating and
maintainingawebpresence.
• Responsiblefor all stagesof Websitecreationsfor clientele,frominitialdesignand
architectureto development,deployment,andmanagementof websites.
Thesamerésuméindicatedthatthepetitionerresidesin WestChester,Ohio,about300milessoutheast
of Chicagoandover900milesnorthof Lakeland.
Thepetitionersubmittedcopiesof her educationalcredentialsandbackgrounddocumentationabout
the importanceof the sciences,but no evidenceor explanationasto how the petitionerpurportedto
qualify for thenationalinterestwaiver.
On December28, 2011, the petitionersubmitteda supplementto the initial filing, intendedto
demonstrateher eligibility for the waiver. Counsel'scover letter accuratelydescribedthe
accompanyingexhibits,butagainreferredto thepetitioner'soccupationas"biomedicalresearch."The
petitionerstated:
I havecollaboratedwith andcontributedsignificantlyto the successof someof the
finest(fortune500) corporationsin the United States,includingHewitt Associates,
ContinentalAirlines, Teradata,and Aon. My uniquebackgroundin the fields of
businessandtechnologyhasenabledme[to] cultivateskillssoughtafterby USfirms.
I continueto workwith AonHewittonInformationTechnologyadvancementsthatwill
be moreefficientandbring significantcostsavingprocessesto our clientsacrossthe
nation.Theknowledgeandskillsgainedfromworkingontheseprojectscanbeapplied
Page5
to differentsectorsofthe economy.Corporationsin theUS candefinitelybenefitfrom
theskillsI havetooffer.. . .
My mostrecentaccomplishmentis with OxBackOffice solutions,aninnovativestart
up venturewith a goalto bring changeto thetransportationindustry. I wasbrought
onboardin early 2011 to defineand designthe specsfor an online transportation
managementsystem. . . thatenabledtransportationcompanies[to] managedriverand
vendorrecords.. . . I proposedaneffectiveapproachto developanall encompassing
TM systemwithin theoriginalbudgetanddeadline.ThescopewasbroadenedandI
proceededto designa systemthat integratedDOT and CSA compliance,vendor
management,drivermanagement,electronicdriverlogsandon-boardmonitoring.This
systemispositionedto fill aholein thetransportationindustry,thussatisfyinganeedof
US firms.
TheworkI havedoneatHewitthassignificantlycontributedtothequalityof employee
healthbenefitsdesignedfor our clients.. . . While thegoalof loweringcostswithout
cuttingdownonqualitymayseemimpossiblemyteamandI wereableto achievethese
goalsby leveragingmytechnical,dataminingandanalysisskills.. . . In our casedata
mining helpedin the recognitionof loopholesin the existinghealthplansthat cost
employersmillionsof dollarsandalsoprovidedthe informationneededto designand
developnewefficientandcosteffectivehealthplans.
In 2010,I establisheda smallbusiness,eFusionLLC focusedon thedevelopmentof
affordablecuttingedgetechnologysolutionsthatenhanceperformance,driveupprofits
andgrowthfor itsclients.. . .
In additionto continuingmy work on improvinghealthbenefitsadministrationby
maintainingmy employmentwith AonHewitt,I intend[to] vigorouslypursuethe
developmentof cuttingedgeapplications.
CurrentlyI amworking on thedevelopmentof a cloudbasedapplicationto supportthe
executionof HCAHPS (Hospital ConsumerAssessmentof HealthcareProvidersand
Systems)initiatives.. . . This systemis beingdesignedto enablehealthproviders'
measure[sic],monitorandimprovetheirkeyperformanceindicators(KPI's).. . . Based
on initial researchconducted,it hasbeenestablishedthatthis systemwouldguarantee
ourclientsa23.6%improvementin theirKPI's in thefirstquarterpostimplementation,
henceimprovinghealthcareintheUnitedStates.
The petitioner'spreviously submittedrésumédid not mentioncurrent employmentwith Aon
Hewitt; it indicatedthat the petitionerworked for Hewitt Associates(later renamedAon Hewitt,
sometimeswritten as "AonHewitt" with no space)as a technicalanalystfrom January2009to
January2011. USCISrecordsindicatethat, at the time shefiled the petition on September26,
2011,the petitionerheld H-1B nonimmigrantstatuspermittingher to work for Ox Back Office
Solutionsandnowhereelse. The approvalof an earlierpetitionpermittedherto work for Hewitt
Associates,but USCIS revoked that approvalin February2011 after the petitioner changed
employers. Hewitt Associatesthen filed a new Form I-129 nonimmigrantpetition on the
Page6
beneficiary'sbehalfon September28, 2011(at roughlythe sametime that the petitionerfiled her
Form I-140 petition). The approvalof that petitionpermittedthe petitionerto work for Hewitt
beginningApril 19,2012,but statementsin therecordappearto indicatethatthepetitionerresumed
herwork atHewittbeforethatdate.
Any work that the petitionerperformedat Aon Hewitt after the petition's filing date cannot
retroactivelyestablisheligibility for the benefitsought. An applicantor petitionermustestablish
thatheor sheis eligiblefor therequestedbenefitatthetime of filing thebenefitrequest.8 C.F.R.
§ 103.2(b)(1). USCIScannotproperlyapprovethe petition at a futuredateafterthe petitioneror
beneficiarybecomeseligibleundera newsetof facts. SeeMatterofKatigbak, 14I&N Dec.45,49
(Reg'l Comm'r 1971).
Thepetitionersubmittedthreewitnessletters. systemsanalystatAon Hewitt,praised
thepetitioner's"uniquebackgroundandherability to completeprojectsefficiently," andstatedthat
the petitioner "was very involved" in adaptingthe company'ssystemsto comply with the
Children's Health InsuranceProgramReauthorizationAct. statedthat the petitioner's
"other significantachievementsincludethe designand developmentof healthplans for Annual
Enrollment, databasemanagementand web portal managementamongothers. Her work is
innovativeandcuttingedgeandheraccomplishmentsasa SystemsAnalystfar exceeds[sic] those
of herpeersatthesamecareerstage"
now a systemsadministratorat Bunch & Associates,Inc., was previouslythe
director of applicationsat Ox Back Office Solutions,and worked with the petitioner in that
capacity. As anexampleof "[a]n outstandingaccomplishment," citedthepetitioner's
"developmentof high-qualityuserinterfaceelementsthatensuredtop notchaestheticqualityacross
applications."
Professor of LaneCollegehired the petitioner'scompanyeFusion"to establisha
webpresence,whichwould createawarenessabout Jbooksandworksof art."
stated:"[The petitioner]createdanexcellentdesignthat exceededmy expectations. . . and
shestill continuesto provideongoingsupportfor theproject."
The letters quotedabovedo not distinguish the petitioner from her peersto an extent that would
justify approvingthe national interestwaiver. Client satisfactionis an important goal, but it does
not warrantspecialimmigrationbenefits. Improvingandoptimizing systemsfor employersand
clients appear to be basic duties of computer analysts,rather than inherently influential
achievements.
Thethird andfinal sectionof the petitioner'ssupplementalsubmissionbearsthe heading"Other
Documents/Publicationsthat EstablishBeneficiary'sEligibility for the NationalInterestWaiver."
The materialswithin this section are generalbackgroundmaterialsfrom the Associationfor
ComputingMachinery and the Bureauof Labor Statistics. Theseitems do not mentionthe
petitioner at all. Therefore,at best they provide general information about the petitioner's
occupation.
Page7
Thedirectorissuedarequestfor evidenceon February1,2012,instructingthepetitionerto "submit
documentaryevidence"to meetthe guidelinesset forth in NYSDOT. In response,the petitioner
submittedcopiesof previouslysubmittedmaterialsandnewinformationaboutheremployment.
Thepetitionerstatedthatthebenefitfrom herwork is nationalin scopebecause"AonHewitt is the
leading provider of benefit administrationservicesin the United States. . . , handling the
administrationof healthcare for more than 9 million employeesand retirees." The petitioner
contendedthat,owingto heremployer'sreach,her"work isusednationally."
In terms of what differentiatesher from her peers,the petitioner statedthat her "mix of IT
[informationtechnology]andBusinessbackgroundsis rarein theIT industry." Thepetitionerlisted
aspectsof various projects she undertook at Aon Hewitt, and stated:"Working to improve
healthcarein the UnitedStatesis the coreof what I do now andprojectto do goingforward." The
petitionerstatesthat her work at Aon Hewitt (both beforesheleft that companyand after she
returned)andat eFusionhaveledto reducedcosts,betterregulatorycomplianceandotherbenefits
to healthcareconsumers,employersandtheUnitedStatesasawhole.
Thepetitionersubmittedbackgroundinformationaboutrisinghealthcarecosts,butno documentary
evidenceshowingthat her personalefforts have held down coststhat otherwisewould have
increased.Thematerialssubmittedoffer no objectivemeansto comparethepetitioner'swork with
thatof otherprofessionalsin herspecialty.
Two further recommendationletters accompaniedthe petitioner's responseto the requestfor
evidence.Aon Hewittsystemsanalyst stated:
[Thepetitioner's]pastwork hasprovidedgreatbenefitsto employersandemployees.
While her work is part of a largercorporation,shehasplayedan enormousrole in
ensuringthatthe solutionsdeliveredto the clientsaretop class.. . . [T]he national
scopeandbenefitof her work is evidentin the numberof client's employeeswho
rely onourbenefitmanagementsystemfor theirhealthbenefitsneeds.. . .
A good portion of employeebenefitscostsis a direct result of poor administration.
For the past couple of months she has been working on a project . . . aimed at
eliminating costly errors in automaticpremium processing,when implementedthe
solutionwill guaranteethat the employerno longeraccruesunwantedexpensesin
the form [of] underbilling andthe employeecanrestassuredthatthey[will] not get
overbilledfor healthbenefits.
now anemployeeretirementspecialistat Skadden,Arpt, Slate,Meagher&
Flom LLP, "becameacquaintedwith [the petitioner]while working asa Calc EngineSpecialistat
AonHewitt."
[The petitioner's] work at AonHewitt is highly recognized. She has worked
tirelessly on many client teamsand projects.. . . . Her work on the Annual
enrollmentprojectshavebeenespeciallyrecognizedbecauseshedeliverstop notch
solutionsto herclients.
Page8
Sheplayeda majorrole on theretirementbenefitsprojectfor KeyCorp. Theclient
was seekinga cost efficient way to make availablehealth benefits for retired
employeesandtheir family memberswho were ineligible for Medicare.. . . Her
solutionwasn'tjust costeffectivebut it providedeasyaccessto thesebenefitsfor the
end users. Consideringthe age of our end users,sherecognizedthat the web
platformalonemay not be the mostefficient way to deliverthesebenefitsandshe
aidedthe developmentof a multi-channeldeliverymethod.. . . Theclient andtheir
retireepopulationwerenothingbut pleasedatthedeliveryof thesolution.
Without documentaryevidenceto clarify the petitioner's contributionsand frame them in the
contextof thework of herpeers,the selectiveanecdotesin thewitnesslettershavelittle valueasa
gaugeof thepetitioner'scontributionsto herfield.
The director deniedthe petition on July 3, 2012. The director found that the petitionerhad
establishedthe substantialintrinsic merit of her occupation,but that "the recordfails to showthat
the beneficiary'swork at her employerrisesto the level of nationalin scope." Thedirectoralso
foundthatthepetitionerhadnot documentedapatternof impactor influencein herfield thatwould
warrantapprovalof thenationalinterestwaiver.
On appealfrom thedirector'sdecision,counselcontendsthat thedirector's"decisiondid not give
properweight to compellingevidence"in the record,andthat the director"appliedan incorrect
legalstandard." Apart from thesegeneralclaims,counselpursuesonly oneavenuein anydetail.
Specifically,counselquotesfrom severalpreviouslysubmittedwitnessletters,andassertsthatthese
materialsoughtto besufficient to establisheligibility for thewaiver.
TheBoardof ImmigrationAppeals(BIA) hasheldthattestimonyshouldnot bedisregardedsimply
becauseit is "self-serving."See,e.g.,Matterof S-A-,22 I&N Dec.1328,1332(BIA 2000)(citing
cases).The BIA also held, however: "We not only encourage,but requirethe introductionof
corroborativetestimonialanddocumentaryevidence,whereavailable."Id. If testimonialevidence
lacks specificity, detail, or credibility, there is a greater need for the petitioner to submit
corroborativeevidence.Matter of Y-B-,21 I&N Dec. 1136(BIA 1998).
The submittedlettersarenot without weight and havereceivedconsiderationabove. USCIS may,
in its discretion, useasadvisoryopinions statementssubmittedasexperttestimony. SeeMatter of
Caron International, 19 I&N Dec. 791, 795 (Comm'r 1988). However,USCIS is ultimately
responsiblefor making the final determinationregardingan alien's eligibility for the benefit
sought. Id. The submissionof letters from expertssupportingthe petition is not presumptive
evidenceof eligibility; USCISmay, asabove,evaluatethe contentof thoselettersasto whether
they supportthe alien's eligibility. USCISmay evengive lessweight to an opinion that is not
corroborated,in accordwith other informationor is in any way questionable.Seeid. at 795;see
alsoMatterof V-K-,24I&N Dec.500,502n.2(BIA 2008)(notingthatexpertopiniontestimony
doesnot purportto be evidenceasto "fact"). SeealsoMatter ofSoffici, 22 I&N Dec. 158, 165
(Comm'r 1998)(citing Matter of TreasureCraft of California, 14 I&N Dec. 190(Reg'l Comm'r
1972)).
Page9
Counselacknowledgesthat thewitnesseshaveall workedwith thepetitionerin somecapacity,but
assertsthat this fact should not automaticallydiscredit the letters or reduce their weight.
Nevertheless,suchletterscannotserveasfirst-handevidenceof thepetitioner'swider impact. The
petitionerhasclaimedthat herwork with national-levelclientshasaffectedmillions of healthcare
consumers.Thepetitionerhasofferedseveralclaimsto that effect,but no documentaryevidence.
Furthermore,working with a national-levelclientelecan, by itself, addressthe "nationalscope"
aspectof theNYSDOTguidelines,but furtherpersuasiveevidenceis necessaryto showthatit is in
thenationalinterestto ensurethatthepetitioner,ratherthanaqualifiedUnitedStatesworker,isthe
oneworking with that clientele.
Witnesseshaveassertedthat the petitionerhasmadeimprovementsin varioussystemsrelatingto
healthplanimplementation.Therecord,however,lackspersuasive,objectiveevidenceto showthat
the petitioner'saccomplishmentsin that areasubstantiallyexceedwhat anemployerwould expect
of anyqualifiedemployeeperformingthosetasks. Fulfilling one'sjob dutiesis not groundsfor the
nationalinterestwaiver. Thepetitionerclaimsespeciallysignificantachievementsin her field, but
the recordoffers minimal informationaboutthe natureand extentof thoseachievements.The
recordcontainsno documentaryevidenceto show,for instance,that the petitioner'sefforts have
substantiallyreducedhealthcarecostsor improvedhealthcaredeliveryfor significantnumbersof
peoplein theUnitedStates,or thatothershaveemulatedthepetitioner'swork in aneffort to benefit
still greaternumbers.If eachprojectis client-specificandproprietary,thenthepotentialfor wider
impact is necessarilyless wide-rangingthan solutions that are generally applicable,widely
available,andeasilyadaptableto differentcircumstances.Thepetitionerhasshownlittle except
thatherpresentandformeremployershavebeensatisfiedwith herwork.
As is clearfrom a plain readingof the statute,it wasnot the intentof Congressthat everyperson
qualifiedto engagein aprofessionin theUnitedStatesshouldbeexemptfromtherequirementof ajob
offer basedon nationalinterest.Likewise,it doesnot appearto havebeenthe intentof Congressto
grantnationalinterestwaiversonthebasisof theoverallimportanceof agivenprofession,ratherthan
on themeritsof the individualalien. On the basisof the evidencesubmitted,thepetitionerhasnot
establishedthata waiverof therequirementof anapprovedlaborcertificationwill be in the national
interestofthe UnitedStates.
The burdenof proof in theseproceedingsrestssolely with the petitioner. Section291 of the Act,
8 U.S.C.§ 1361.Thepetitionerhasnot sustainedthatburden.
ORDER: Theappealisdismissed.