dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Journalism

identifying data deleted to 
prevent c!.;;" ,,,,warranted 
invasion of personal pnvacy 
PlffiUC COpy 
DATE: JAN 1 Q 2012 
INRE: Petitioner: 
Beneficiary: 
OFFICE: TEXAS SERVICE CENTER 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services 
Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) 
20 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., MS 2090 
Washington, DC 20529-2090 
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
PETITION: Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker as a Member of the Professions Holding an Advanced 
Degree or an Alien of Exceptional Ability Pursuant to Section 203(b)(2) of the Immigration 
and Nationality Act, 8 US,C § 1153(b)(2) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
INSTRUCTIONS: 
Enclosed please find the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office in your case, All of the documents 
related to this matter have been returned to the office that originally decided your case, Please be advised that 
any further inquiry that you might ha ve concerning your case must be made to that office. 
If you believe the law was inappropriately applied by us in reaching our decision, or you have additional 
information that you wish to have considered, you may file a motion to reconsider or a motion to reopen. The 
specific requirements for filing such a request can be found at 8 C.F.R. § 103.5. All motions must be 
submitted to the office that originally decided your case by filing a Form I-290B, Notice of Appeal or Motion, 
with a fee of $630. Please be aware that 8 CF.R. § 103.5(a)(1)(i) requires that any motion must be filed 
within 30 days of the decision that the motion seeks to reconsider or reopen. 
Thank you, 
Perry Rhew 
Chief, Administrative Appeals Office 
www.uscis.gov 
DISCUSSION: The Director, Texas Service Center, denied the employment-based immigrant visa 
petition. The matter is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The AAO will 
dismiss the appeal. 
The petitioner seeks classification pursuant to section 203(b)(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act 
(the Act), 8 U.S.c. § 1153(b)(2), as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree. At the 
time she filed the petition, the petitioner stated that she sought employment as an international 
broadcaster with Voice of America (VOA), an international broadcasting service established and funded 
by the United States government. The petitioner asserts that an exemption from the requirement of a 
job offer, and thus of a labor certification, is in the national interest of the United States. The director 
found that the petitioner qualifies for classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced 
degree, but that the petitioner has not established that an exemption from the requirement of a job offer 
would be in the national interest ofthe United States. 
On appeal, the petitioner submits a brief from counsel and copies of previously submitted exhibits. 
Section 203(b) of the Act states, in pertinent part: 
(2) Aliens Who Are Members of the Professions Holding Advanced Degrees or Aliens of 
Exceptional Ability. -
(A) In General. - Visas shall be made available ... to qualified immigrants who are 
members of the professions holding advanced degrees or their equivalent or who 
because of their exceptional ability in the sciences, arts, or business, will substantially 
benefit prospectively the national economy, cultural or educational interests, or welfare 
of the United States, and whose services in the sciences, arts, professions, or business 
are sought by an employer in the United States. 
(B) Waiver ofJob Offer-
(i) ... the Attorney General may, when the Attorney General deems it to be in 
the national interest, waive the requirements of subparagraph (A) that an alien's 
services in the sciences, arts, professions, or business be sought by an employer 
in the United States. 
The director did not dispute that the petitioner qualifies as a member of the professions holding an 
advanced degree. The sole issue in contention is whether the petitioner has established that a waiver of 
the job offer requirement, and thus a labor certification, is in the national interest. 
Neither the statute nor the pertinent regulations define the term "national interest." Additionally, 
Congress did not provide a specific definition of "in the national interest." The Committee on the 
Judiciary merely noted in its report to the Senate that the committee had "focused on national interest by 
increasing the number and proportion of visas for inunigrants who would benefit the United States 
economically and otherwise .... " S. Rep. No. 55, IOlst Cong., 1st Sess., II (1989). 
Page 3 
Supplementary information to regulations implementing the Immigration Act of 1990 (IMMACT), 
published at 56 Fed. Reg. 60897, 60900 (November 29, 1991), states: 
The Service [now U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS)] believes it 
appropriate to leave the application ofthis test as flexible as possible, although clearly 
an alien seeking to meet the [national interest] standard must make a showing 
significantly above that necessary to prove the "prospective national benefit" 
[required of aliens seeking to qualifY as "exceptional."] The burden will rest with the 
alien to establish that exemption from, or waiver of, the job offer will be in the 
national interest. Each case is to be judged on its own merits. 
Matter a/New York State Dept. a/Transportation, 22 I&N Dec. 215 (Act. Assoc. Comm'r 1998), has 
set forth several factors which must be considered when evaluating a request for a national interest 
waiver. First, the petitioner must show that the alien seeks employment in an area of substantial 
intrinsic merit. Next, the petitioner must show that the proposed benefit will be national in scope. 
Finally, the petitioner seeking the waiver must establish that the alien will serve the national interest to a 
substantially greater degree than would an available U.S. worker having the same minimum 
qualifications. 
While the national interest waiver hinges on prospective national benefit, it clearly must be established 
that the alien's past record justifies projections of future benefit to the national interest. The petitioner's 
subjective assurance that the alien will, in the future, serve the national interest cannot suffice to 
establish prospective national benefit. The inclusion of the term "prospective" is used here to require 
future contributions by the alien, rather than to facilitate the entry of an alien with no demonstrable prior 
achievements, and whose benefit to the national interest would thus be entirely speculative. 
The AAO also notes that the regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2) defines "exceptional ability" as "a 
degree of expertise significantly above that ordinarily encountered" in a given area of endeavor. By 
statute, aliens of exceptional ability are generally subject to the job offer/labor certification 
requirement; they are not exempt by virtue of their exceptional ability. Therefore, whether a given 
alien seeks classification as an alien of exceptional ability, or as a member of the professions holding 
an advanced degree, that alien cannot qualifY for a waiver just by demonstrating a degree of 
expertise significantly above that ordinarily encountered in his or her field of expertise. 
The petitioner filed the Form 1-140 petition on August 3, 2007. In an accompanying statement, the 
petitioner discussed the intrinsic merit and national scope of reaching out to Mandarin speakers, "the 
largest ethnic population in the world," through VOA's Mandarin service. The director did not 
contest the intrinsic merit or national scope ofthe occupation, and therefore the AAO does not need 
to discuss these elements in detail. 
With respect to her own work in the occupation, thc petitioner stated: 
With two master degrees majored [sic] in public communication and one bachelor 
degree majored in journalism, I have established outstanding academic records that 
can rarely be matched by U.S. journalists with minimum qualifications .... I have 
also received systematic academic training regarding [the] public communication 
system in China. These diverse academic backgrounds have given me unambiguous 
leverage in the proposed employment, because China is the primarily targeted region 
of the proposed employment at VOA. 
. . . [My] diverse academic experiences also greatly enhance my abilities to gather 
region-specific information, to investigate news developments, to conduct direct 
interviews and to evaluate the significance of various news leads. These unique skills 
are typical[ly] not available to an [sic] United States journalist with minimum 
qualification for this job. 
More importantly, these diverse academic backgrounds provide me with unique 
perspectives in analyzing background information related to stories and enable me to 
provide complete and accurate information to our targeted foreign listeners. The 
international correspondent is a uniquely dynamic occupation, which demands 
thorough understanding [of] the social and cultural contexts of [the] targeted 
audience. Because VOA's [Mandarin] listener populations are primarily residences 
in China and other Asian regions, my previous backgrounds in China will be a great 
asset to its operation. Perceivably, my ability to serve the national interest is of 
substantially greater extent than the majority of my colleagues. 
Although a few U.S. journalists may have comparable lingual skill in Chinese ... , 
they will be very unlikely to have similar backgrounds, skills and perspectives as I do. 
I also made significant achievements as a professional journalist. ... I was employed 
with Southern Weekend, the largest and the most influential weekly newspaper in 
China .... I received widely [sic] recognition from both my readers and my 
co lleagues ... . 
I had also worked with the Public Affair[ s] Office of VOA. During this period, I 
have planned and designed the [M]andarin version of the VOA's Studio Tour 
program [on] my own .... In terms of editorial skills, this project is extremely 
challenging because it requires the correspondent to be intimately familiar with both 
American and Chinese culture, in addition to excellent bi-lingual capabilities. By 
virtue of my contribution, the [M]andarin project has become so successful that it is 
now the most popular visitor's program at VOA's headquarter[s] in Washington DC. . 
In light of all my accomplishments and credentials, it is fair to conclude that few u.s. 
international correspondent [ s] with minimum job qualifications would make 
Page 5 
comparable contribution[ s] to our national interest as I do. In fact, it would be 
contrary to the national interest to potentially deprive VOA of my continuing services 
by making available to U.S. workers the proposed position. Thus, there are sufficient 
grounds to waiver [sic] the labor certification process. 
The petitioner's initial filing included background materials about VOA, in both English and 
Chinese. These submissions make it clear that the petitioner based her waiver claim not on the 
overall merits of international broadcast work, but on working for VOA in particular. 
The petitioner entered the United States in 2003, at the age of21, to study at Ohio University. After 
earning a master's degree in international affairs there in 2005, she entered Georgetown University 
where she received a master's degree in telecommunications policy in May 2007, two months before 
she filed the present petition on her own behalf Thus, at the time of filing, the beneficiary had just 
completed her graduate studies and was, in fact, still classified as an F-I nonimmigrant student. The 
record indicates that most of the petitioner's broadcasting experience, as of 2007, consisted of 
internships in conjunction with her studies. 
Several witness letters accompanied the petition. 
reflected the petition's specific emphasis on _ stating: 
tour manager, 
The geopolitical influence cannot be overemphasized. 
Being the oldest and the largest U.S. government-sponsored international broadcaster, 
delivers news reports to a weekly worldwide audience of 115 million people. 
Among 48 languages used at [sic] itself with 84 
hours of radio airtime and 10 hours of TV programming on a weekly basis, reaching 
millions of people throughout China and elsewhere in Asia. Through radio, 
television, and the Internet, our Mandarin broadcasting has been served [sic] as an 
important vehicle in promoting U.S. government's domestic and international agenda. 
Relating to the petitioner's work at did not discuss the petitioner's skills or 
achievements as a broadcaster, instead discussing her earlier work as a public relations intern: 
In my entire career, I have rarely seen any colleague like [the petitioner], who has 
demonstrated such impressive progress in the early age of her career. In 2005, [the 
petitioner] joined our office as an intern at a critical juncture, when our Mandarin tour 
program was struggling to take off Designed to represent a half-century's journey at 
VOA, this program not only demands superior organizational skills, but also presents 
a unique challenge to our correspondents in terms of editorial techniques . 
. . . [T]he is a natural extension of ; 3 L worldwide outreach. 
The largest share of our international visitors comes from China, the Mandarin tour 
service at the Office of Public Affairs has long been called upon by our audiences .... 
Page 6 
[The petitioner] has been instrumental in versioning [sic] and reaLltz:mg 
Tour program in Mandarin. Starting from scratch, she was in charge of the project's 
entire planning and management process. 
The same witness stated "the number of our visitors from China has gone up over 60%," but did not 
state the actual number of visitors. Without such figures, it is difficult to determine how significant 
a role the studio tour plays in overall mission. 
witness, 
an inte:rnaltional 
credited the petitioner with 
'U]J"lU Chinese-language version of our Studio Tour." Like the previous 
acimc)wlledge,j, but did not describe, the petitioner's subsequent position as 
the Voice of America to work in 
acknow ledged that the petitioner "returned to 
but said nothing more about her work there. 
The only witness at _ to discuss t~ner's international broadcasting work in any detail 
was producer and senior correspondent_, who "worked closely with [the petitioner] in 2005 
during her internship at (The petitioner's own curriculum vitae does not 
mention any 2005 . at _ called the petitioner "an 
indispensable part of our team [who] has made [an] influential contribution to our broadcasting. Her 
name comes up frequently as the person who has made the most significant breakthrough in recent 
time, advancing our program quality." The letter contains no other details about the nature of the 
petitioner's "influential contribution" or "breakthrough." 
The remaining witnesses commented on the petitioner's earlier president 
f Ohio University, stated that the petitioner "has distinguished herself as a very bright, 
diligent person who has developed into a talented professional in the area of 
communications and information policy." 
stated: 
I first came to know [the petitioner] in 2002 when she was working as a full-time 
reporter at Southern Weekend, where I was working as the Director of the Editorial 
Sections. As her supervisor, I was impressed by her professionalism and work ethics 
as a journalist. It is my observation that [the petitioner] is an excellent journalist and 
has tremendous potential in the field of international journalism. 
My organization, Southern Weekend, is the most influential weekly newspaper in 
China, with the largest circulations and reader population in the region. We are proud 
to have the most talented reporters from all over the country. In this competitive 
environment, [the petitioner] stood out with her exceptional dedication and devotion 
to this profession. When [the petitioner] first came to our office, she worked as a 
junior reporter, responsible for collecting news leads and conducting field 
interview[s]. Soon after, she [was] highly recognized for her vigorous and prolific 
writing among her colleagues. While some young journalists may have distinguished 
Page 7 
academic success like [the petitioner], few have achieved comparable editorial skills 
and proficiency. I consider [the petitioner] to be one of the most responsible and 
competent news reporters of our organization. 
praised the petitioner's "extreme courage" in pursuing a story on food safety even after 
"a high-ranking government official threatened to 'interfere' with 's~f [the 
petitioner] should decide to publish the story .... Now working at ~ [the 
petitioner] continues to advocate freedom and democracy as an international broadcaster." 
On April 8, 2009, the director issued a notice of intent to deny the petition, stating that the petitioner 
had not established the influence of her work. The director erroneously referred to the petitioner's 
occupation as bridge construction engineering. 
In response, counsel asserted that the petitioner "is a gifted Broadcast News Analyst" with "an 
impressive background in communications and broadcast journalism." Counsel repeatedly referred 
to the petitioner's work at _ in the past tense, indicating that the petitioner had left_ by mid-
2009. Nevertheless, when discussing the scope and significance of the petitioner's intended future 
work, counsel discussed _ at length, and stated that the national interest waiver would spare 
_ the cumbersome labor certification process. 
The submitted new letters, some of which simply repeat prior submissions. A new letter 
from dated April 30, 2009, closely matches that witness's earlier letter of July 25, 
2007, with one change. The 2007 version of the letter included a paragraph indicating that the 
petitioner is "[n]ow working as an International Broadcaster at _." The 2009 letter omitted this 
language, consistent with the conclusion that the petitioner had left ~y then. Otherwise, the 
letter is identical to its 2007 counterpart, and thus requires no further discussion. Similarly, an April 
29, 2009 letter from _is almost identical to the same witness's earlier letter, dated July 23, 
2007, with occasional, unimportant variations in wording. 
China correspondent for "Asia Calling" in Indonesia (and a graduate student at 
Ohio University in 2003-2005 while the petitioner was also study~ed that the petitioner 
gave her "a grasp on the nature of journalism works in China." _ asserted: "I can see 
from our discussions that [the petitioner] has a deep understanding of domestic and foreign affairs of 
both China and the U.S. This understanding is complementing her lan~ producing 
reports that benefit the American public to see the changing world." _ offered no 
discussion of the petitioner's work as a journalist or news analyst, instead vaguely praising the 
petitioner's cultural perspective. 
stated: 
I was impressed by [the petitioner's] excellent work in covering political issues in 
Washington DC. In 2007, the former awarded a medal to 
_ the spirit [sic] leader of Tibet. Due to the sensitive political relationship 
between China and Tibet, any news of the topic is strictly censored by the Chinese 
Page 8 
government and it possibly ~hinese people's protest. At that time, 
[the petitioner] was serving ~ as a news reporter. [The petitioner] 
successfully interviewed people from various sides and independently wrote the story 
in a short time. It was published by. on its website the same day, and later cited 
by many bloggers and independent news websites. Her story provided audience [sic] 
with opinions from various angles and was very balanced. As an experienced 
reporter, I was very impressed by her capability in dealing with sensitive political 
topics within a few hours and her elegance in facing activists from different religions 
and cultural backgrounds. 
The next witne:", attorney at the Federal Trade Commission, stated: 
As an employee of the United States government for the past 14 years, I share the 
same goals and aspirations as [the petitioner] - that is, to serve the U.S. government 
and public interest. As a second generation Chinese American, I also share and can 
appreciate [the petitioner's] unique skills and talents in reaching out to the Chinese 
American community here in the United States, as well as in communicating the 
cultural values of Americans to people in China and the rest of the world. My own 
parents immigrated from China to the United States, and have long understood the 
importance of Voice of America, particularly in its radio broadcasting to countries all 
over the world, and the enormous impact it has had on the lives of ordinary Chinese 
living in China. 
I first met [the petitioner] at a language study center here in Washington D.C., where 
I was looking for a Chinese language tutor for my two teenage children. I was 
immediately struck by her openness and energy, and her desire to reach out to the 
Chinese American community. [The petitioner] at fIrst volunteered to assist me in 
fmding a Chinese language teacher for my children by reaching out to her contacts in 
the Washington, D.C. community. She also volunteered to devote time from her own 
busy schedule, working at the Voice of America, to personally teach Chinese to my 
children. She has since become a close family friend. 
praised the petitioner's journalistic work, but she did not claim any training or expertise in 
bro'ad(;ast journalism. _ added that the petitioner "also volunteered at the D.C. Mayor's 
office every year to explain updated health and safety policies to senior Chinese American citizens 
in the community, and has provided them translation services as well." Volunteer work of this kind 
is admirable, but its impact is local rather than national. Also, the work is not occupational in nature 
and is, therefore, not a strong basis for an employment-based immigrant classifIcation. 
a broadcast technician at. stated: 
I have rarely seen anyone' who is as much of a consummate 
professional in a wide variety of roles; broadcaster, interviewer, translator, editor, 
producer, and director. She seems to have a real gift for performing in each of these 
Page 9 
roles with a spirit of cooperation that makes others want to work with her. Her 
technical abilities excel far beyond the norm, and we all benefit from her ease in 
managing difficult situations. 
radio specialist at the Radio Policy Bureau of the Korea Communications Commission, 
While I was on an overseas training as a graduate student at Georgetown University 
in the United States, I studied closely and extensively with [the petitioner] in 2005 
and 2006 when she was also [a] graduate student in the same master's program called 
Communication, Culture & Technology. Because of our similar background in 
broadcasting, I have been in touch with her in the past four years. During the past 
four years, I was impressed by [the petitioner's] contributions to Voice of America, 
the second largest broadcasting agency in the world. 
Broadcasting has tremendous power in growth of democratic society through its 
unique function of dissemination of information. _ has been contributing in 
diffusion of democracy and human rights during many critical time periods in history, 
such as ... WWII and the "Cold War." Since [the] collapse of [the] Soviet Union as 
a representative of socialism, the role of China has been growing in politics, culture 
and economy . 
. . . I see [the petitioner] as one of the best broadcast professionals that I have ever 
known. Especially in terms of her cultural background as a Chinese [sic], her 
extensive journalism experience, talented writing skills, and active participation in 
cultural diversity activities has been and will continue to be a great asset to the United 
States. 
The petitioner submits Chinese-language printouts of several _ stories, including the article 
described summaries. All of the articles date from a period of about four 
months between October 18, 2007 and February 21,2008. 
The director denied the petition on December I, 2009, stating that the petitioner had not established 
sufficient past impact on the field of international broadcasting to justify the special benefit of a 
national interest waiver. On appeal, counsel argues that the director "[e]rred in determining that [the 
petitioner's] work is not in an area of substantial intrinsic merit." The director made no such 
determination, and therefore counsel's rebuttal requires no further discussion. 
The director's decision was more ambiguous with respect to the national scope of the petitioner's 
work, sometimes disputing it and sometimes acknowledging at least the potential for national scope. 
More importantly for the purposes of this appellate decision, the director specifically stated: "The 
issue in this case is not whether the position in international broadcasting is in the national interest, 
but whether the beneficiary, to a greater extent than U.S. workers having the same qualifications, 
plays a significant role in that field." Therefore, any general arguments about international 
Page 10 
broadcasting (as opposed to specific assertions about the petitioner) are redundant to the discussion 
of the appeal. 
Turning to the petitioner's specific qualifications, counsel states: "There are no Americans who 
would have [the petitioner's] unique skill set and ability." This is a claim of fact, for which counsel 
provides no supporting documentation. The unsupported assertions of counsel do not constitute 
evidence. See Matter of Obaigbena, 19 I&N Dec. 533, 534 n.2 (BIA 1988); Matter of Laureano, 
19 I&N Dec. I, 3 n.2 (BIA 1983); Matter of Ramirez-Sanchez, 17 I&N Dec. 503, 506 (BIA 1980). 
Counsel then revisits a theme from the initial filing of the petition, specific to _, stating: "As 
Voice of America is a government-funded agency, they are unable to hire foreign nationals. To 
require Voice of America to wait until [the petitioner's] labor certification is approved would result 
in a gap in service to the national and international viewing and listening audience." The flaw in this 
assertion is that the petitioner had already worked for _ as a contractor. Counsel does not 
explain why this arrangement could not continue, and why "a gap in service" would inevitably 
result. Furthermore, this argument begs the question of why it is in the national interest to ensure 
that the petitioner, rather than another qualified journalist, fills the position a~. 
The petitioner resubmits previously submitted copies of her articles, and evidence that other news 
agencies have cited her reports. This evidence, in isolation, serves only to prove that the petitioner 
was a journalist in late 2007 and early 2008. It does not show that the petitioner's work was of a 
higher quality, or had a greater impact, than that of other international journalists. Likewise, the 
petitioner did not show that the references to her work in other reports is a particular mark of esteem 
rather than a routine identification of sources. By way of analogy, a reporter for a wire service such 
as the Associated Press is not automatically a recognized and influential journalist as an individual, 
yet the use of wire stories is common throughout the field of journalism. 
While adjudicating the appeal, the AAO became aware of unrelated information, which the AAO 
conveyed to the petitioner in a notice dated November 10, 2011. That notice read, in part: 
While your appeal has been pending, news reports have indicated that __ would end 
radio and television broadcasts in Mandarin, and significantly cut its Mandarin-language 
staff. _ itself has reported on these proposed cuts, publishing the Broadcasting 
Board of Governors' Fiscal Year 2012 Budget Request online at 
http://media.voanews.comldocuments/FY 2012 BBG Congressioal Budget Final We 
b Version2.pdf (excerpt added to record November 2, 2011). Page 11 ~ 
request (page 113 of the online version) states: "The Agency will shift _ 
from traditional radio and television broadcasting to a web-only platform utilizing new 
media technologies." The document further proposes a transfer of Mandarin-language 
radio broadcasts to Radio Free Asia, a separate entity under the authority of the 
Broadcasting Board of Governors. The proposal indicates that these changes would 
eliminate 45 jobs related to "Broadcasting to China." The changes would be effective 
on October 1, 2011, the first day of fiscal year 2012. 
Page II 
The AAO acknowledges that you seek a waiver of the job offer requirement. 
Nevertheless, an essential part of your claim of eligibility fur the waiver is your assertion 
that you would work fo . The above information proposed 
significant job cuts in that service. Therefore, the AAO cannot consider the merits of 
your claim to serve the national interest through employment with the~until and 
unless you show that the _ win, in fact, employ you in the capacity described. 
Please submit evidence directly from a _ official with hiring authority to show that 
_ still intends to employ you as a broadcaster in its Mandarin service. Your 
intention to seek continued employment there is not evidence of _ intention to 
continue to employ you. 
In the alternative, the AAO will consider comparable evidence from Radio Free Asia's 
Mandarin service, indicating that you would fin a role there that will be similar to your 
previously proposed employment at _. Because much of your original evidence 
specificany concern~importance and reach, any new claim regarding Radio 
Free Asia must also include documentation comparing the Mandarin services of Radio 
Free Asia and _ 
The petitioner has responded to the notice, but the petitioner's response does not include any 
evidence of_ intention to employ her in the future. This omission of requested evidence can, 
itself, warrant denial ofa petition. See 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(l4). 
Counsel incorrectly claims that "the AAO does not reference the news reports consulted." The AAO 
did cite a news source - _ itself Counsel asserts "there have been numerous reports that 
indicate that _broadcasting to China will likely continue," but acknowledges that "the news 
reports are speculative at best." 
The above-quoted statements from counsel do not address the question of the petitioner's continued 
employment at _ Instead, counsel asserts that previous witnesses have attested to "the cross­
over utility of [the petitioner's] broadcast journalism skins with a specialty in reporting on issues 
related to the United States and China," and that the petitioner "does not necessarily require a 
promise of employment from-' for approval [The petitioner's ]1-140 Petition, is 
based on her contributions to reporting at the her expertise can be utilized by another 
employer and the petition can remain valid." 
Counsel cites a 1995 letter from an official of what was then the Immigration and Naturalization 
Service, stating that an approved petition with a national interest waiver would remain valid if the 
alien changed employers. The letter describes a general principle, wherein an alien's contributions 
lie in the nature of his or her work rather than the identity of his or her employer. By quoting from 
the 1995 letter, counsel has attempted to minimize the petitioner's career shift. In the present 
instance, however, the lack of evidence of _ continued intention to employ the petitioner is 
highly significant to the outcome of this proceeding. 
Page 12 
Throughout the proceeding, counsel has e~sized not just the petitioner's journalistic skills and 
achievements, but also the importance of_ as a vehicle for the petitioner's journalism. In the 
initial filing, the petitioner stated: "it would be contrary to the national interest to potentially deprive 
_ of my continuing services." Even as late as the appeal (filed after USCIS records show the 
petitioner had left., counsel had urged USCIS not "[t]o require Voice of America to wait until 
[the petitioner's] labor certification is approved." From the beginning, the petitioner's work not just 
as a reporter, but as Wlilrrter at _, has been integral to the national interest waiver application. 
One cannot divorce _ from the waiver claim without eviscerating the underlying arguments for 
the waiver. 
The waiver claim rested not only on the petitioner's journalism, but on the international platform the 
_ would provide. The AAO, in its 2011 notice, afforded the petitioner the opportunity to 
establish a job offer from another employer with similar international reach, but the petitioner 
provided no such evidence. Counsel claims that the petitioner's skills are such that, wherever she 
works, she will make a similar contribution to what she would have made at _ This claim lacks 
credibility, as it ignores the undeniable fact that media outlets have widely divergent areas of reach 
that differ in scope by many orders of magnitude. The claim is also flawed because it presumes the 
petitioner's continued employment in broadcast journalism. If the petitioner applies her skill set to a 
related but distinct occupation, such as public relations, then there is no longer any justification for 
the claim that she serves the national interest as an international broadcaster. 
As is clear from a plain reading of the statute, it was not the intent of Congress that every person 
qualified to engage in a profession in the United States should be exempt from the requirement of a job 
offer based on national interest. Likewise, it does not appear to have been the intent of Congress to 
grant national interest waivers on the basis of the overall importance of a given profession, rather than 
on the merits of the individual alien. On the basis of the evidence submitted, the petitioner has not 
established that a waiver of the requirement of an approved labor certification will be in the national 
interest of the United States. 
The burden of proof in these proceedings rests solely with the petitioner. Section 291 of the Act, 
8 U.S.c. § 1361. The petitioner has not sustained that burden. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.