dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Legal Consulting

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: MAR. 20, 2024 In Re: 30542620 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, a legal consultant, 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. 
§ 1153(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 the Petitioner qualified 
for classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree but that the Petitioner 
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 Christo 's, Inc., 26 l&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 a member of the professions holding an advanced 
degree or an individual of exceptional ability in the sciences, arts, or business. Because this 
classification requires that the individual's services be sought by a U.S. employer, a separate showing 
is required to establish that a waiver of the job offer requirement is in the national interest. 
While neither the statute nor the pertinent regulations define the term "national interest," we set forth 
a framework for adjudicating national interest waiver petitions in the precedent decision Matter of 
Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. 884 (AAO 2016). Dhanasar states that, after a petitioner has established 
eligibility for EB-2 classification, USCIS may, as a matter of discretion, grant a national interest 
waiver if the petitioner demonstrates: (1) that the noncitizen's proposed endeavor has both substantial 
merit and national importance; (2) that the noncitizen is well positioned to advance the proposed 
endeavor; and (3) 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. See Flores v. Garland, 72 F.4th 85, 88 (5th Cir. 2023) 
(joining the Ninth, Eleventh, and D.C. Circuit Courts (and Third in an unpublished decision) in 
concluding that USCIS' decision to grant or deny a national interest waiver is discretionary in nature). 
The first prong, substantial merit and national importance, focuses on the specific endeavor that the 
noncitizen 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. 
See Matter ofDhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 888-91, for elaboration on these three prongs. 
II. ANALYSIS 
The Director found that the Petitioner qualifies as a member of the professions holding an advanced 
degree. The remaining issue to be determined is whether the Petitioner has established that a waiver 
of the requirement of a job offer, and thus of a labor certification, would be in the national interest. 
For the reasons discussed below, the Petitioner has not established that a waiver of the requirement of 
a job offer is warranted. 
The Petitioner described the endeavor as a plan "to continue using my expertise and knowledge gained 
through my ten (10) years of experience, to serve as a legal consultant at my company." The Petitioner 
elaborated that her company "will offer expert legal and business consulting services to U.S. 
companies that either already have an established presence in the Brazilian market or wish to do so in 
the future." The record contains a business plan, which indicates that the Petitioner will work as the 
general manager and lead consultant of the company, which will be "based in I I Florida." The 
business plan also indicates that the company will employ one legal advisor, business consultant, and 
administrative assistant, respectively, for a total of four workers, including the Petitioner, in the first 
year of operation, adding two additional legal advisors and business consultants, respectively, for a 
total of eight workers, including the Petitioner, by the fifth year of operation. The business plan further 
notes that the company "will hire the services of independent marketing specialist and accountant 
[sic]," but it will not directly employ those workers. 
The Director found that the proposed endeavor has substantial merit. However, the Director observed 
that the record does not establish that the proposed endeavor will have broader implications beyond 
the consulting company's prospective clients and customers or that the proposed endeavor will have 
substantial positive economic effects. Therefore, the Director concluded that the record does not 
establish the proposed endeavor has national importance, as required by the first Dhanasar prong. The 
Director further concluded that the record does not satisfy the second or third Dhanasar prongs. See 
Matter ofDhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 888-91, for elaboration on these three prongs. 
On appeal, the Petitioner summarizes generalized information regarding management consulting and 
data related to trade between the United States and Brazil, and she asserts that transnational business 
correlates to increased importation and exportation, generally "benefitting the national economy," 
increasing tax revenue, and potentially creating unspecified jobs. She opines that, if her clients 
conduct successful business operations in Brazil, that "could inspire others to follow suit." The 
2 
Petitioner asserts that "the fortification of STEM as a significant national benefit" is a factor in 
determining whether her proposed endeavor may have national importance. The Petitioner further 
states that her "unique legal and business consulting expertise for US companies in the Brazilian 
market is an innovation." The Petitioner also asserts that, by employing herself as a general manager 
of her own startup company, her proposed endeavor will address an "urgent need" for general 
managers among employers in Florida. The Petitioner also references information unrelated to 
whether the proposed endeavor may have national importance, such as her qualifications and letters 
of interest from prospective clients, which relate to the second Dhanasar prong-whether an 
individual is well positioned to advance an endeavor. See id. for an elaboration of the three prongs. 
In determining national importance, the relevant question is not the importance of the industry, field, 
or profession in which an individual will work; instead, to assess national importance, we focus on the 
"specific endeavor that the [ noncitizen] proposes to undertake." See Matter of Dhanasar, 26 I&N 
Dec. at 889. Dhanasar provided examples of endeavors that may have national importance, as 
required by the first prong, having "national or even global implications within a particular field, such 
as those resulting from certain improved manufacturing processes or medical advances" and endeavors 
that have broader implications, such as "significant potential to employ U.S. workers or has other 
substantial positive economic effects, particularly in an economically depressed area." Id. at 889-90. 
We first note that the generalized information regarding management consulting and data related to 
trade between the United States and Brazil, referenced by the Petitioner on appeal, does not inform 
how the proposed endeavor may have national importance. Again, we focus on the "specific endeavor 
that the [ noncitizen] proposes to undertake" to determine whether the endeavor may have national 
importance, not on the importance of the industry, field, or profession in which an individual will 
work. See id. at 889. Because the generalized information regarding management consulting and data 
related to trade between the United States and Brazil, referenced by the Petitioner on appeal, does not 
discuss the Petitioner, the specific proposed endeavor, and how the endeavor may have national 
importance, it is immaterial to this part of the Dhanasar analysis. See id. Relatedly, the Petitioner's 
references to abstract importation and exportation, tax revenue, and unspecified job creation rely on 
more generalizations about the results of typical business activity, rather than providing probative 
information about what the Petitioner plans to accomplish through the endeavor and how it may have 
national importance. 
Next, contrary to the Petitioner's assertions on appeal, whether a petitioner qualifies as a member of 
the professions with an advanced degree in science, technology, engineering, or mathematics (STEM) 
does not alter the analysis of whether a proposed endeavor may have national importance. In all 
national interest waiver cases, the record must establish that a proposed endeavor-STEM-based or 
otherwise-has both substantial merit and national importance. See generally 6 USCIS Policy Manual 
5(D)(2), https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual. To assess national importance, the relevant question 
is not the importance of the industry, field, or profession in which an individual will work; instead, we 
focus on the "specific endeavor that the [ noncitizen] proposes to undertake." See Matter ofDhanasar, 
26 I&N Dec. at 889. Moreover, the Petitioner does not establish how her proposed endeavor of owning 
and operating a legal consulting company involves STEM beyond routine business administration. 
Next, the Petitioner's unsubstantiated assertions on appeal that her "unique legal and business 
consulting expertise for US companies in the Brazilian market is an innovation" is unpersuasive. The 
3 
record does not establish how the Petitioner's legal and business consulting services are sufficiently 
distinguishable from other legal and business consultants' services, to have the type of "national or 
even global implications within a particular field, such as those resulting from certain improved 
manufacturing processes or medical advances" contemplated by Dhanasar. Id. at 889-90. 
Next, the Petitioner asserts that there is an "urgent need" for general managers among employers in 
Florida and that, by creating a new company and employing herself as her own company's general 
manager, she will help meet that need. The record does not establish how the Petitioner's self­
employment as her own company's general manager may mitigate a need for general managers among 
other employers in Florida, urgent or otherwise. Rather, the Petitioner's self-employment as her own 
company's general manager appears to benefit herself as her own employee (and employer), and it 
addresses her own company's need-a need that she created by founding the company. 
We note again that, although the Petitioner references information unrelated to whether the proposed 
endeavor may have national importance, such as her qualifications and letters of interest from 
prospective clients, that information relates to the second Dhanasar prong-whether an individual is 
well positioned to advance an endeavor. See id. at 889-90 for an elaboration of the three prongs. We 
need not further address information unrelated to whether the proposed endeavor may have national 
importance for the purpose of this analysis. 
The Petitioner's proposed endeavor of founding a legal and business consulting company appears to 
benefit the Petitioner, as the company's owner, and the individuals and entities who may use the 
company's services as customers and clients. However, the record does not establish how the 
endeavor may have broader implications within the field of legal practice, business management, 
commerce, or any other field, with the type of"national or even global implications within a particular 
field, such as those resulting from certain improved manufacturing processes or medical advances," 
contemplated by Dhanasar. See id. The record does not establish how the Petitioners plan toemploy 
a total of eight workers, including herself, in the job positions noted above, in the Florida, 
area, demonstrates the proposed endeavor may have a "significant potential to employ U.S. workers 
or ... other substantial positive economic effects, particularly in an economically depressed area." Id. 
In summation, the Petitioner has not established that the proposed endeavor has national importance, 
as required by the first Dhanasar prong; therefore, she is not eligible for a national interest waiver. 
We reserve our opinion regarding whether the record satisfies the second or third Dhanasar prong. 
See INS v. Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. 24, 25 (1976) (stating that agencies are not required to make "purely 
advisory findings" on issues that are unnecessary to the ultimate decision); 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). 
III. CONCLUSION 
As the Petitioner has not met the requisite first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework, we 
conclude that the Petitioner has not established eligibility for, or otherwise merits, a national interest 
waiver as a matter of discretion. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
4