dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: It Sales Management

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: NOV. 2, 2023 In Re: 28805562 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, a sales manager, seeks classification as a member of the professions holding an 
advanced degree and 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. § ll 53(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. 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 record did not 
establish that the Petitioner qualifies for the national interest waiver. 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 Christo 's, Inc. , 26 I&N Dec. 537, 537 n.2 (AAO 2015). Upon de novo review, 
we will dismiss the appeal. 
I. LAW 
To qualify for a national interest waiver, a petitioner must first show eligibility 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 EB-2 eligibility, 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 I&N Dec. 884, 889 (AAO 2016), provides the framework for adjudicating national 
interest waiver petitions. Dhanasar states that USCIS may, as matter of discretion, 1 grant a national 
interest waiver if the petitioner demonstrates that: 
1 See also Poursina v. USCIS, 936 F.3d 868 (9th Cir. 2019) (finding USCIS' decision to grant or deny a national interest 
waiver to be 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. 
II. ANALYSIS 
The Director determined that the Petitioner qualifies for classification as a member of the professions 
with an advanced degree because his baccalaureate degree and subsequent experience are equivalent 
to a master's degree under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2). Discussion of the Petitioner's parallel claim of 
exceptional ability is moot. 
The issue before us is whether the Petitioner has established that a waiver of the requirement of a job 
offer, and thus a labor certification, would be in the national interest. The Director determined that 
the Petitioner had established the substantial merit of the proposed endeavor, but not its national 
importance. The Director also concluded that the Petitioner had not met the second and third prongs 
of the Dhanasar national interest framework. 
After earning a bachelor's degree in business administration in 2001, the Petitioner worked in Brazil 
in lower sales positions for a telecommunications company from 2000 to 2005, and then as a sales 
manager for an appliance manufacturer from 2005 to 2006, and for a computer company from 2007 
to 2014. The Petitioner entered the United States as an F-1 nonimmigrant student in 2014, and was 
general manager and co-owner of a food company in Florida from 2014 to July 2019. He has since 
worked as a te1ritory manager for software companies in the United States. 
The Petitioner stated that he "intend[ s] to work in the United States as a sales manager" for information 
technology (IT) companies. He listed eight activities that he would perform "as an IT sales manager": 
• Execute and manage B2B (Business to Business) sales, aiming to exceed targets. 
• Lead and coach sales teams with the goal of promoting best practices in sales and 
opportunity management. 
• Coordinate sales activities and plan sales and new customer acquisition strategies. 
• Understanding customer needs and providing the necessary solutions. 
• To offer clarifications and technical information about infonnation technology 
products aimed at adapting companies to the new reality of work, which more than 
ever is no longer a place and is now an activity that can be performed from 
anywhere, through any device. 
• To spread and provide guidance on cyber security in the face of new models of 
remote and hybrid working. 
• Make technology solutions aimed at including people in the new remote/hybrid 
work market available. 
• Spreading the best business practices in the technology market, promoting fast and 
secure access to applications. 
The Petitioner elaborated on some, but not all, of the listed items. 
2 
The first Dhanasar prong, substantial merit and national importance, focuses on the specific endeavor 
that the individual 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 and look for broader implications. Matter ofDhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. 
In denying the petition, the Director stated that the Petitioner had not shown that his proposed endeavor 
would have a significant impact beyond his employer and customers within his sales tenit01y. On 
appeal, the Petitioner states that his proposed endeavor "has broader implications within his field," 
"impacts a matter that the government has recognized as having national importance," and 
"contributes to the I.T. industry." We agree with the Director's determination, as explained below. 
Initially, the Petitioner provided general information about the importance of sales personnel. This 
information does not show how the Petitioner's proposed endeavor, in particular, would be of national 
impmiance. The tenn "endeavor" is more specific than the general occupation; a petitioner should 
offer details not only as to what the occupation normally involves, but what types of work the person 
proposes to undertake specifically within that occupation. See generally 6 USCIS Policy Manual 
F.5(D)(l), https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual. The Petitioner's initial submission offered few 
details except that he intended to work for one or more unspecified companies in the IT field. 
The Director requested additional evidence to show that the benefit from the Petitioner's proposed 
endeavor would "sufficiently extend beyond an organization and its clients." In response, the 
Petitioner described various broad areas of national concern, such as cybersecurity and economic 
performance. The issue, however, is the national importance of his specific proposed endeavor, not 
the collective or aggregate importance of all businesses or the entire IT industry. 
The Petitioner did not adequately explain how his specific activities would have national importance. 
For example, he stated that his proposed endeavor will increase profits, leading to job growth and 
greater tax revenue, but he did not provide any specific, conoborated figures. A stated intention to 
work in an important field or industry does not establish the national importance of a proposed 
endeavor within that field or industry. 
The Petitioner's cunent employer, which hired him after the petition's filing date, called the Petitioner "a 
top contributor" whose sales work "has generated a revenue of over $3 million." The Petitioner did not 
establish the wider significance of this figure beyond benefit to his employer. By statute, individuals who 
"will substantially benefit prospectively the national economy" are, neve1iheless, subject to the job offer 
and labor ce1iification requirement. Section 203(b )(2)(A) of the Act. Also, "an individual cannot qualify 
for a waiver just by demonstrating a degree of expertise significantly above that ordinarily encountered 
in his field of expertise." Matter ofDhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 886 n.3. 
The Petitioner stated that his proposed endeavor "will strengthen the U.S. company's infonnation 
technology systems to prevent cyber-attacks and the loss of confidential infmmation," because he will 
"contribute to the guidance and awareness of companies on cybersecurity." The Petitioner did not 
elaborate or explain how his work as a sales manager would have broader implications for 
cybersecurity. 
3 
On appeal, the Petitioner again relies largely on general assertions, stating, for example, that his 
"Proposed Endeavor has broader implications within his field because it will contribute to expanding 
sectors that need digital transformation." The discussion that follows that claim concerns the 
increasing importance of IT to a variety of businesses, rather than any broader implications of the 
Petitioner's own proposed endeavor as a sales manager in IT. 
Also on appeal, the Petitioner repeats his intention to "contribute to the guidance and awareness of 
companies on cybersecurity." The information cited on appeal establishes the importance of 
cybersecurity but does not explain how the Petitioner's proposed endeavor relates to cybersecurity and 
would have a nationally important impact. 
The Petitioner asse1is that his proposed endeavor "contributes to boosting the American I.T. industry," 
which is a "critical infrastructure sector." In this section of the briet: the Petitioner describes his 
current employer but does not explain how his proposed endeavor "contributes to boosting the ... 
industry." As discussed above, the overall importance of a given industry or field does not suffice, by 
itself, to show that employment within that industry or field has national importance. 
The burden of proofremains on the Petitioner to establish eligibility, and his successful employment 
with a large software company does not suffice to show that his proposed endeavor has broader 
implications that indicate national importance. The Petitioner has not overcome the Director's 
determination in this regard. 
Detailed discussion of the remaining prongs cannot change the outcome of this appeal. Therefore, we 
reserve argument on the other prongs of the Dhanasar national interest framework. 2 
III. CONCLUSION 
The Petitioner has not established the national importance of the proposed endeavor. Therefore, the 
Petitioner has not shown eligibility for the national interest waiver, and we will dismiss the appeal as 
a matter of discretion. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
2 See INS v. Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. 24, 25-26 ( 1976) (stating that, like courts, federal agencies are not generally required 
to make findings and decisions unnecessary to the results they reach); see also Matter olL-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). 
4