dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Law

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: NOV. 21, 2023 In Re: 28945881 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, a lawyer, seeks classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced 
degree. See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 203(b)(2), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(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, 8 U.S.C. § 1 l 53(b )(2)(B)(i). 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 although the Petitioner 
qualified for classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree, she had not 
established that a waiver of the required job offer, and thus of the labor certification, would be in the 
national interest. The matter is now before us on appeal. 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 Christa's, Inc. , 26 I&N Dec. 537, 537 n.2 (AAO 2015). Upon de novo 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. Next, a 
petitioner must then demonstrate they merit a discretionary waiver of the job offer requirement "in the 
national interest." Section 203(b)(2)(B)(i) of the Act. Matter of Dhanasar , 26 I&N Dec. 884, 889 
(AAO 2016) provides that USCIS may, as matter of discretion, 1 grant a national interest waiver if the 
petitioner shows: 
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 concluded that the Petitioner qualifies as a member of the professions holding an 
advanced degree. Accordingly, the remaining issue to be determined on appeal 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 first prong, substantial merit and national importance, focuses on the specific endeavor that the 
noncitizen proposes to undertake. See Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. The endeavor's merit may be 
demonstrated in a range of areas such as business, entrepreneurialism, science, technology, culture, 
health, or education. In determining whether the proposed endeavor has national importance, we 
consider its potential prospective impact. 
In a professional plan and statement submitted with the petition, the Petitioner stated that she intends 
to continue her activities as a lawyer in the United States and noted that her familiarity with Brazilian 
law will assist U.S. companies engaged in cross-border projects. 
She farther stated: 
My career plan in the United States is to work with law firms, businesses or 
corporations to provide expert advice as a lawyer. My extensive career working and 
studying in a wide array of specializations of law will be beneficial to the U.S. legal 
industry, especially when dealing with the complex laws of Brazil, Latin America, and 
abroad. Legal Consultants are vital resources to even the most sophisticated in-house 
legal departments because they bring management expertise, proprietary industry 
knowledge, insights into practices, and an objective viewpoint. Based on my deep 
familiarity with the Brazilian legal and bureaucratic landscape, I am uniquely qualified 
to help U.S. companies better navigate through the current political turmoil and 
economic difficulties in Brazil. My superior knowledge of the Brazilian legal system 
will bring an added benefit to the United States and my career as a lawyer. 
With the approval of my visa petition, the United states will benefit from my unique 
legal expertise and skills as a lawyer. As previously discussed, the array of legal fields 
I have experienced in is vast and include civil law, extrajudicial and judicial relations, 
family and secession law, and legal advisory slash preventative law. Consequently my 
unique efforts will potentially impact the US buy; 
• Help U.S. companies engaged in any cross-border projects 
• Expanding businesses in the legal mediation market through online platforms 
• Assisting low income individuals in legal services 
2 
• Contributing to the justice gap 
• Expanding the American workforce 
In addition to her professional plan and statement, the Petitioner submitted copies of her academic 
credentials, an expert opinion letter, letters of recommendation, and industry articles and reports. 
The Director determined that the Petitioner's initial filing did not establish that the proposed endeavor 
had substantial merit or national importance. The Director observed that the Petitioner did not provide 
specific insight as to what she intends to do in the United States, and requested a detailed description 
of the proposed endeavor so that her request for a national interest waiver could be evaluated under 
the Dhanasar framework. 
In response, the Petitioner submitted a new professional plan and statement which provided further 
information about her proposed endeavor. The Petitioner stated that her proposed endeavor was to 
"provide legal services for American companies that maintain a relationship with the Brazilian 
Market." She further stated that she "will focus her work in bringing good collaboration to private 
sector companies, which somehow maintain a relationship with the resilient market and need bilingual 
professionals and knowledge of national legislation." 
The Petitioner also stated that she intended to focus on providing services to American companies in 
the context of corporate law and legal compliance. Specifically, she stated: 
In the field of Corporate Law, through preventive legal advice, I will provide companies with 
detailed guidance and clarification on all the rights and duties of the company and the 
entrepreneur according to the Brazilian law system, in order to reduce the risk of the activity 
and, consequently, the losses, which impacts any increase in the company's profit. Through 
detailed analysis and drafting of contracts, I will manage to prevent future risks and guarantee 
the company an effectiveness in commercial relations, reducing possible losses with the 
objective of a fair agreement. 
In Legal Compliance, I will ensure that the company's day-to-day practices comply with the 
internal statutes and the Brazilian legislation that governs its activities, ensuring compliance 
with labor, tax, consumer law, etc., all rights and duties, contracts and legalization applicable 
to the company, all with the aim of reducing the risks of the activity and preventing legal 
proceedings. I will provide all legal advice from the beginning to the end of the process, always 
applying the most recent Brazilian legislation and jurisprudence that are favorable to the client, 
developing an objective and effective defense. 
The Petitioner also noted that she would use her legal experience "to improve operations and achieve 
better productivity and profitability levels, therefore generating revenues within the country and 
creating employment opportunities." 
The Petitioner also submitted a new expert opinion letter and additional letters of recommendation in 
support of her eligibility for a waiver of the job offer. 
3 
In denying the pet1t10n, the Director determined that the Petitioner demonstrated the proposed 
endeavor's substantial merit, but did not provide sufficient evidence to establish the proposed 
endeavor's national importance. The Director determined that the Petitioner had not shown that her 
proposed endeavor had significant potential to employ U.S. workers, would offer substantial positive 
economic effects for the United States, or that the benefits to the national economy resulting from the 
proposed endeavor would reach a level contemplated by the Dhanasar framework. 
On appeal, the Petitioner provides a brief emphasizing her qualifications as a lawyer. She further 
asserts that she has submitted substantial evidence of significant past achievements, and that these 
achievements are a way to assess the potential prospective impact of her proposed endeavor. 
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 undertake." See Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. In Dhanasar, we 
further 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 Petitioner claims that her proposed endeavor has national importance because law and legal 
services impact all sectors of the economy. In support of her arguments, she offered information, 
including articles and reports, about the importance of law and legal consulting and its crucial role in 
the U.S. economy, the effect of COVID-19 on the legal sector, and the importance and significance of 
cross-border transactions. We recognize the value oflaw and legal services; however, merely working 
in an important field is insufficient to establish the national importance of the proposed endeavor. 2 
Similarly, the Petitioner's professional plans emphasize the value oflaw and legal services instead of 
focusing on the prospective impact of her specific endeavor. The Petitioner discusses the benefits of 
legal consulting, highlighting how her familiarity with Brazilian law will promote and facilitate 
cross-border transactions and stimulate the economy by creating jobs and revenue. However, the 
Petitioner does not point to any corroborating evidence that would directly link her specific endeavor 
to the overall economy's growth. The Petitioner must support her assertions with relevant, probative, 
and credible evidence. See Matter ofChawathe, 25 I&N Dec. at 376. 
Throughout the record and in her professional plans, the Petitioner points to her background, 
education, and experience in her field. 3 The Petitioner also provided several letters of support that 
2 We further note that the Petitioner's counsel refers to these reports and articles throughout the record, asserting that the 
status of the U.S. legal sector impacts the U.S. people and its economy. On appeal, counsel emphasizes the Petitioner's 
experience in the field and generally asserts that her proposed endeavor will help facilitate cross-border transactions and 
assist companies engaged in international contract negotiations, thereby helping the national economy by providing crucial 
legal consulting services to U.S. companies. The assertions of counsel do not constitute evidence. Matter ofObaigbena, 
19 l&N Dec. at 534 n.2 (citing Matter of Ramirez-Sanchez, 17 l&N Dec. at 506). Counsel's statements must be 
substantiated in the record with independent evidence, which may include affidavits and declarations. 
3 While we do not discuss each piece of evidence individually, we have reviewed and considered each one. 
4 
discuss her legal capabilities and experience. The Petitioner's knowledge, skills, and experience in her 
field, however, relate to the second prong of the Dhanasar framework, which "shifts the focus from the 
proposed endeavor to the foreign national." See Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 890. The issue here is 
whether the specific endeavor that she proposes to undertake has national importance under the second 
consideration of Dhanasar's first prong. 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. While the evidence indicates that she is an experienced attorney in 
Brazil who appears to be well-respected by her colleagues, the record does not contain evidence that 
the Petitioner's past achievements resulted in a broad impact on the legal field, and the Petitioner's 
general, conclusory statements to the contrary are insufficient to meet her burden of proof We also 
note that while a Petitioner's past work and achievements may be helpful in illustrating how they plan 
to carry out their proposed endeavor or its potential prospective impact, the focus of the first prong is 
on the proposed endeavor itself and not the petitioner. See id. at 889. 
The Petitioner submitted advisory opinions from
.___-..-- _____ ,..... associate teaching professor 
of law atl IUniversit School of Law and chief of staff in the office of 
general counsel for.______________________ __.letter generally discusses 
the Petitioner's qualifications and experience as a lawyer and her potential to provide legal services to 
companies seeking to expand into international markets as well as low-income Americans. The letter 
from I Ifocuses on the high demand for legal professionals, noting that the occupation of 
lawyers/attorneys is anticipated to increase 10% by 2031.I lalso discusses the Petitioner's 
professional experience and accomplishments and notes that her expertise in Brazilian law will 
potentially benefit U.S. companies and clients in a variety of business and commercial transactions. 
Neither writer discusses with specificity the Petitioner's proposed endeavor, or how such an endeavor 
will have national or global implications within the field, will have significant potential to employ 
U.S. workers, or will have other substantial positive economic effects, particularly in an economically 
depressed area as mandated by Dhanasar. Id. at 890. 
Although both writers discuss the Petitioner's qualifications, as well as the importance of the legal 
sector, the growing demand for legal professionals, and the importance of cross-border transactions 
and relations, their conclusions are not based on the national importance of the Petitioner's specific 
endeavor. Moreover, while they recite the Petitioner's career history and accomplishments, and praise 
her success as a lawyer in Brazil, their findings stem from the significance of law and legal services, 
particularly in relation to legal consulting for U.S. companies engaging in business with Brazil and 
Latin America. The letters therefore does not establish the national importance of the Petitioner's 
specific proposed U.S. work. See Matter of Caron Int'!, Inc., 19 I&N Dec. 791, 795 (Comm'r 1988) 
(holding that the immigration service may reject or afford less evidentiary weight to an expert opinion 
that conflicts with other information or "is in any way questionable"). The letter does not contain 
sufficient information and explanation of the Petitioner's proposed endeavor, nor does the record 
include adequate corroborating evidence, to show that the Petitioner's specific proposed work as a 
lawyer offers broader implications in her field or substantial positive economic effects for our nation 
that rise to the level of national importance. 
We noted in Dhanasar that "we look for broader implications" of the proposed endeavor and 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 
5 
to have national importance." See Dhanasar , 26 I&N Dec. at 890. Although the Petitioner recounts 
the value and importance of law and legal services and their general impact on business growth, 
Dhanasar requires us to focus on the "the specific endeavor that the foreign national proposes to 
undertake," not the importance of the field, industry, or profession in which the individual will work. 
Id. at 889. 
While the Petitioner claims that she will use the legal system to help clients, provide advice to 
corporations on a variety of legal issues, promote the growth of U.S. jobs, and facilitate cross-border 
transactions, several of these objectives simply describe the typical occupational duties of an attorney 
rather than establishing that the Petitioner's specific proposed endeavor has national importance.4 
Additionally, other than listing these objectives, the Petitioner's professional plans do not provide 
further specific details as to how these objectives would be accomplished. The Petitioner's statements 
reflect her intention to provide valuable legal consulting services for her clients or employers, but she 
has not offered sufficient information and evidence to demonstrate that the prospective impact of her 
proposed endeavor rises to the level of national importance. 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 her field more broadly. See id. at 893. Here, we conclude the Petitioner has not 
shown that her proposed endeavor stands to sufficiently extend beyond her employers or clients to 
impact her field, the legal sector, or the U.S. economy more broadly at a level commensurate with 
national importance. 
Furthermore, the Petitioner has not demonstrated that the specific endeavor she proposes to undertake 
has significant potential to employ U.S. workers or otherwise offers substantial positive economic 
effects for our nation. Without sufficient information or evidence regarding any projected U.S. economic 
impact or job creation attributable to her future work, the record does not show that benefits to the regional 
or national economy resulting from the Petitioner's legal consulting services would reach the level of 
"substantial positive economic effects" contemplated by Dhanasar. Id. at 890. Accordingly, the 
Petitioner' s proposed work does not meet the first prong of the Dhanasar framework. 
Because the documentation in the record does not establish the national importance of her proposed 
endeavor as required by the first prong of the Dhanasar precedent decision, the Petitioner has not 
demonstrated eligibility for a national interest waiver. Since this issue is dispositive of the Petitioner 's 
appeal, we decline to reach and hereby reserve the appellate arguments regarding her eligibility under 
the second and third prongs outlined in Dhanasar. 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 ofL-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 In determining national importance, the analysis focuses on what the petitioner will be doing rather than the specific 
occupational classification. For instance, although the petitioner in Matter of Dhanasar was an engineer by occupation, 
the decision discusses his specific proposed endeavor "to engage in research and development relating to air and space 
propulsion systems, as well as to teach aerospace engineering." See generally 6 USCIS Policy Manual F.5(D)(l) , 
http://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual; see also Matter ofDhanasar, 26 l&N Dec. at 891. 
6 
III. CONCLUSION 
As the Petitioner has 
not met the requisite first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework, we conclude 
that she has not established she is eligible for or otherwise merits a national interest waiver as a matter 
of discretion. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
7