dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Information Technology

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: SEP. 26, 2023 In Re: 28355056 
Appeal of Nebraska Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, an information technology specialist 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). 
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 Nebraska Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the record did not 
establish that the Petitioner is eligible for or otherwise merits a national interest waiver as a matter of 
discretion. 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 apreponderance of the evidence. 
Matter of Chawathe, 25 l&N Dec. 369, 375-76 (AAO 2010). We review the questions in this matter 
de nova. Matter of Christo 's, Inc., 26 l&N Dec. 537, 537 n.2 (AAO 2015). Upon de nova 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. Section 203(b)(2)(B)(i) of the Act. 
Once a petitioner demonstrates eligibility for the underlying classification, the petitioner must then 
establish eligibility for 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 USCIS may, as matter 
of discretion1, grant a national interest waiver if the petitioner demonstrates that: 
• 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 found that the Petitioner qualifies as a member of the professions holding an advanced 
degree. The record reflects that determination. 
However, the Director found the record did not establish that a waiver of the requirement of a job 
offer, and thus a labor certification, would be in the national interest. The Director found that while 
the Petitioner demonstrated the proposed endeavor has substantial merit, she did not establish that the 
proposed endeavor is of national importance, as required by the first Dhanasar prong. The Director 
further found that the Petitioner did not establish that she is well positioned to advance the proposed 
endeavor, and 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. Upon de novo review, we agree with the Director's 
determination that the Petitioner did not demonstrate that a waiver of the labor certification would be 
in the national interest.2 
The first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework, substantial merit and national importance, 
focuses on the specific endeavor that a petitioner proposes to undertake. The endeavor's merit may 
be demonstrated in a range of areas, such as business, entrepreneurial ism, science, technology, culture, 
health, or education. 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 unde1iake." Matter of Dhanasar, 26 l&N Dec. 
at 889. 
The Petitioner proposes to work in the United States as the chief executive officer and information 
technology specialist for her new information management consulting business. The Petitioner's 
statement describes her proposed endeavor stating, "My proposed endeavor is to build on my extensive 
experience and expertise in diverse fields of information technology, accounting, [sic] and financial 
management to analyze business systems-related data to determine where improvement can be made 
and develop data-backed systems to help organizations make those improvements." Her business plan 
explains that the business will specialize "in the design and provision of customized Enterprise 
Resource Planning (ERP) system solutions and support services based on the Oracle ERP financial 
module software program." (emphasis omitted) for medium-sized U.S. based businesses in California. 
We agree with the Director that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor has substantial merit. 
Even though the Petitioner's proposed endeavor has substantial merit, the Director found that the 
record did not show that the proposed endeavor is of national importance. The Director concluded the 
record did not sufficiently demonstrate the Petitioner's claims in her statements and in her business 
1 See also Poursina v. USC1S, 936 F.3d 868 (9th Cir. 2019) (finding USCIS' decision to grant or deny a national interest 
waiver to be discretionary in nature). 
2 While we may not discuss every document submitted, we have reviewed and considered each one. 
2 
plan that her proposed endeavor will benefit the U.S. economy or advance the global competitiveness 
of U.S. companies. The Director noted that in determining national importance, we focus on the 
specific endeavor that the Petitioner intends to undertake, rather than the importance of the industry 
or profession. See id. The Director explained that while recommendation letters show her being a 
valuable and skilled professional, they did not show that the Petitioner has influenced her field or has 
had national or global importance to her field beyond the significance on her employers. 
The Petitioner argues on appeal that the Director's decision "contains instances of amisunderstanding 
and misapplication of law that go beyond harmless error and reach the levels of abuse of discretion." 
The Petitioner contends the Director did not fully examine and consider the totality of the evidence in 
the record and that she submitted '·ample arguments ... regarding the national importance of the 
proposed endeavor, with each argument supported by objective, documentary evidence." When 
determining her proposed endeavor's national importance, the Petitioner argues that the Director 
should have considered the sufficiency of the objective, documentary evidence submitted with the 
initial filing and in the reply to the request for evidence, including documentation from "US 
government and private sector sources speaking to the critical urge to adapt the business organization 
in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, all of which supports the Petitioner's affirmation, being far 
from mere statements." Upon de novo review, we find the record does not demonstrate that the 
Petitioner's proposed endeavor satisfies the national importance element of Dhanasar's first prong, as 
discussed below. 
The Petitioner stresses on appeal that the Director erred in not considering the totality of the evidence 
in the issuance of the request for evidence notice and the denial decision. She argues the request for 
evidence notice failed to provide an assessment of the initially submitted evidence, to clearly identify 
the evidence's deficiencies, and to provide guidance for rectifying any concerns with the submitted 
documentation. We disagree with the Petitioner's claims relating to the deficiencies of the Director's 
request for evidence and denial decision. 
Although the Director did not provide an analysis of the initial evidence in the request for evidence 
notice, the notice apprised the Petitioner that the initial evidence did not sufficiently show the national 
importance of her proposed endeavor and explained the evidence needed to establish its national 
importance. Also, the Director's decision properly analyzed the Petitioner's documentation and 
weighed the evidence to evaluate the Petitioner's eligibility by a preponderance of the evidence. The 
standard of proof in this proceeding is preponderance of the evidence, meaning that a petitioner must 
show that what is claimed is "more likely than not" or "probably" true. Matter of Chawathe, 25 l&N 
Dec. at 375-76. To determine whether a petitioner has met the burden under the preponderance 
standard, we consider not only the quantity, but also the quality (including relevance, probative value, 
and credibility) of the evidence. Id.; Matter of E-M-, 20 l&N Dec. 77, 79-80 (Comm'r 1989). 
To evaluate whether the Petitioner's proposed endeavor satisfies the national importance requirement, 
we look to evidence documenting the "potential prospective impact" of her work. Matter of Dhanasar, 
26 l&N Dec. at 889. The record does not demonstrate that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor will 
substantially benefit the field of information technology, as contemplated by Dhanasar: "[a]n 
undertaking may have national importance for example, because it has national or even global 
implications within a particular field, such as those resulting from certain improved manufacturing 
processes or medical advances." Id. As pointed out by the Director, the evidence does not suggest 
3 
that the Petitioner's information management consulting business would impact the information 
technology field more broadly. 
The Petitioner argues that her statements in the record clearly explain her proposed endeavor to utilize 
"custom-based ERP software systems as a matter having national importance or as the subject of 
national initiatives, such that its developing and implementation would be nationally important." She 
describes the importance of businesses to manage their processes by utilizing custom-built software 
systems to "tackle existing and emerging challenges, increase productivity, manage costs and risks, 
and drive economic growth." The Petitioner points out that the record includes reports describing the 
advantages of the Oracle ERP software system for businesses, and the demand for its products has 
created U.S. jobs, contributed to economic growth, and investment in research and development. She 
argues that implementing "custom-built ERP software applications would maximize [a] companies' 
efficiency, generate cost savings solutions and improve operational performance, thereby enhancing 
its ability to compete in the global market and, consequently, the U.S. economy as a whole." 
The record includes the Petitioner's business plan describing the business' environmental, social, and 
economic benefits to show its national importance. Her business would promote corporate 
sustainability by offering ERP software systems "while carefully balancing the three main pillars of 
corporate sustainability: economic, environmental and social .... " The business plan proposes using 
"environmentally friendly methods" when handling computer equipment; socially "treating its 
employees, prospective clients and other partnering entities in accordance with the highest ethical and 
operational standards, mirrored through fair employee treatment and effective communication"; and 
economically it would be a profitable business. The business plan also explains the Petitioner's 
ownership of the business; the Petitioner's education and work experience; the business' products and 
services; the significance of the information technology industry; and the business' proposed 
marketing, staffing, and financial forecasts. 
However, the Petitioner has not provided corroborating evidence to support her claims that her 
business' activities stand to provide substantial economic, environmental, and societal benefits to 
California or the United States. The Petitioner's claims that her information management consulting 
business will benefit the U.S. economy, environment, and society has not been established through 
independent and objective evidence. The Petitioner's statements are not sufficient to demonstrate her 
endeavor has the potential to provide economic, environmental, and societal benefits. The Petitioner 
must support her assertions with relevant, probative, and credible evidence. See Matter of Chawathe, 
25 l&N Dec. at 376. Also, without sufficient documentary evidence that her proposed job duties as 
the chief executive officer and information technology specialist for her business would impact the 
information management consulting industry more broadly, rather than benefiting her consulting 
business and her proposed clients, the Petitioner has not demonstrated by a preponderance of the 
evidence that her proposed endeavor is of national importance. 
For instance, the business plan projects that in five years the consulting business will hire 11 direct 
employees, pay wages of almost one million dollars, and generate over two hundred thousand dollars 
in taxes. However, the record does not sufficiently detail the basis for its financial and staffing 
projections, or adequately explain how these projections will be realized. While the Petitioner 
expresses her desire to contribute to the United States, she has not established with specific, probative 
evidence that his endeavor will have broader implications in his field, will have significant potential 
4 
to employ U.S. workers, or will have other substantial positive economic effects in California or the 
United States. The Petitioner must support her assertions with relevant, probative, and credible 
evidence. See id. Even if we were to assume everything the Petitioner claims will happen, the record 
lacks evidence showing that creating 11 direct jobs, paying wages of almost one million dollars, and 
generating over two hundred thousand dollars in tax revenue over a five-year period rises to the level 
of national importance. 
The business plan also explains the business's dedication to transferring skills and knowledge by 
hiring experienced U.S. workers to train and guide recent graduates. 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. Matter of Dhanasar, 26 l&N Dec. at 893. Similarly, the 
Petitioner and her employees transferring their knowledge to less experienced employees does not rise 
to the level of national importance as it would not impact the field more broadly. 
The Petitioner argues on appeal that the national importance of her proposed endeavor is evidenced in 
industry reports and articles. The reports and articles relate to the ERP software system and its 
importance to small and medium-sized businesses; custom software development; the Oracle 
corporation; the growth of software developer jobs in the United States; the labor shortage of qualified 
software developers; the COVI D-19 disease; the expansion of her employer's business; and the role 
of business system analysts. We recognize the importance of the information management and the 
software development industries, and related careers; however, merely working in the information 
management and software development fields or starting an information management consulting 
business to support these industries is insufficient to establish the national importance of the proposed 
endeavor. Instead, we focus on the "the specific endeavor that the foreign national proposes to 
undertake." See id. at 889. 
In Dhanasar, we noted that "we look for broader implications" of the proposed endeavor and that 
"[a]n undertaking may have national importance for example, because it has national or even global 
implications within a particular field." Id. We also stated that "[a]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. The industry reports and articles submitted do not discuss any of the Petitioner's claimed 
economic, environmental, and societal impacts specifically attributable to the Petitioner's proposed 
endeavor. 
The Petitioner argues that her proposed endeavor to create, develop, and implement ERP software 
systems is of national importance since finance technologies has been designated as an area of 
particular importance to the national security of the United States by the National Science and 
Technology Council in its Critical and Emerging Technologies List Update dated February 2022. The 
Petitioner asserts that creating, developing, and implementing ERP software systems falls under the 
financial technologies subfields of distributed ledger technologies, digital assets, digital payment 
technologies, and digital identity infrastructure. However, outside of the Petitioner's general 
assertions, the record does not show that the Petitioner's information management consulting business 
focusing on the implementation of ERP software systems is related to or falls under the financial 
technology subfields. 
5 
We recognize the importance of the science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (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."3 "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. Many 
proposed endeavors that aim to advance STEM technologies and research, whether in academic or 
industry settings, ... have sufficiently broad potential implications to demonstrate national 
importance."4 However, the Petitioner has not established that her proposed endeavor aims to advance 
STEM technologies or research. Also, the record does not show that her proposed endeavor would 
have an impact in a STEM field more broadly to establish its national importance. 
The record includes recommendation letters from colleagues, former employers, and her clients. The 
letters mainly discuss the Petitioner's work experience, her knowledge of software system 
implementation for businesses' financial and accounting operations, and her professionalism working 
with them. The letters convey her software system and accounting expertise and the importance of 
her work to specific projects which helped her employers and clients overcome technology and 
financial operation challenges. For instance, letters from the Petitioner's former colleagues emphasize 
the Petitioner's technical expertise in the Oracle software systems and her successful implementation 
of new software systems for clients. Letters from other colleagues similarly attest to the Petitioner's 
software system and accounting knowledge and her importance to improving the financial operations 
for her employers and clients. However, these documents relate to the second prong of the Dhanasar 
framework. See Matter of Dhanasar, 26 l&N Dec. at 890. We acknowledge that the Petitioner 
provided valuable software system implementation and accounting services for her employers and 
clients in the past. However, as indicated by the Director, the Petitioner has not offered sufficient 
information and evidence based on these recommendation letters to demonstrate the prospective 
impact of her proposed endeavor will rise to the level of national importance, rather than only 
impacting her clients. The letters do not demonstrate that the Petitioner's work will have national or 
global implications in the field of information management. 
The Petitioner does not demonstrate that her proposed endeavor extends beyond her business and her 
future clients to impact the field or any other industries or the U.S. economy more broadly at a level 
commensurate with national importance. Beyond general assertions, she has not demonstrated that 
the work she proposes to undertake as the chief executive officer and information technology specialist 
of her proposed information management consulting business offers original innovations that 
contribute to advancements in the information management industry or otherwise has broader 
implications for her field. The economic, environmental, societal, and national security benefits that 
the Petitioner claims depend on numerous factors, and the Petitioner did not offer a sufficiently direct 
evidentiary tie between her proposed business' information management consulting work and the 
claimed results. 
Because the documentation in the record does not sufficiently establish the national importance of the 
Petitioner's proposed endeavor as required by the first prong of the Dhanasar precedent decision, she 
has not demonstrated 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 the Petitioner's appellate 
3 See generally 6 USCIS Policy Manual F.5(0)(2), https://www.uscis.gov/policymanual. 
4 See generally 6 USCIS Policy Manual, supra, at F.5(0)(2). 
6 
arguments regarding her eligibility under the second and third prongs. 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 of L-A-C-, 26 l&N Dec. 516, 526 n.7 
(BIA 2015) (declining to reach alternative issues on appeal where an applicant is otherwise ineligible). 
Ill. CONCLUSION 
As the record does not establish that the Petitioner has met the requisite first prong of the Dhanasar 
analytical framework, we find that the Petitioner is not eligible for anational interest waiver as amatter 
of discretion. The appeal will be dismissed for the above stated reasons. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
7