dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Legal Services

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 19939051 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date : DEC . 14, 2021 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker (Advanced Degree, Exceptional Ability, National 
Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, a legal advisor, seeks second preference 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 EB-2 classification. See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) 
section 203(b )(2), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b )(2). 
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 he had not 
established that a waiver of the required job offer, and thus of the labor certification, would be in the 
national interest. 
On appeal, the Petitioner submits a brief asserting that he is eligible for a national interest waiver. 
In these proceedings, it is the petitioner's burden to establish eligibility for the immigration benefit 
sought. Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361. 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. 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. 
Section 203 (b) of the Act sets out this sequential framework: 
(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) National interest waiver. ... [T]he 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. 
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, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) may, as matter 
of discretion 1, grant a national interest waiver if the petitioner demonstrates: ( 1) that the foreign 
national's proposed endeavor has both substantial merit and national importance; (2) that the foreign 
national 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. 
The first prong, substantial merit and national importance, focuses on the specific endeavor that the 
foreign national 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. 
The second prong shifts the focus from the proposed endeavor to the foreign national. To determine 
whether he or she is well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor, we consider factors including, 
but not limited to: the individual's education, skills, knowledge and record of success in related or 
similar efforts; a model or plan for future activities; any progress towards achieving the proposed 
endeavor; and the interest of potential customers, users, investors, or other relevant entities or 
individuals. 
The third prong requires the petitioner to demonstrate 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. In performing 
this analysis, USCIS may evaluate factors such as: whether, in light of the nature of the foreign 
national's qualifications or the proposed endeavor, it would be impractical either for the foreign 
national to secure a job offer or for the petitioner to obtain a labor certification; whether, even assuming 
that other qualified U.S. workers are available, the United States would still benefit from the foreign 
national's contributions; and whether the national interest in the foreign national's contributions is 
sufficiently urgent to warrant forgoing the labor certification process. In each case, the factor(s) 
1 See also Poursina v. USC1S. No. 17-16579, 2019 WL 4051593 (Aug. 28, 2019) (finding USCIS' decision to grant or 
deny a national interest waiver to be discretionary in nature). 
2 
considered must, taken together, indicate 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. 2 
II. ANALYSIS 
The Director determined that 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 a labor certification, would be in the national interest. For the 
reasons discussed below, we agree with the Director that the Petitioner has not sufficiently 
demonstrated the national importance of his proposed endeavor under the first prong of the Dhanasar 
analytical framework. 
Regarding his claim of eligibility under Dhanasar's first prong, the Petitioner indicated that he intends 
to continue his "career in the U.S. as a foreign legal adviser and international business consultant to 
U.S. companies in the field of public law and public affairs in Brazil" and "to facilitate U.S. companies 
in cross-border dealings and bilateral corporate investment." He asserted that his "work plan in the 
United States is aimed at entering U.S. companies with the ability to provide legal advice and guidance 
regarding cross-border transactions and the development of business within Brazil and Latin 
America." The Petitioner also listed 11 "cross-border positions which are actively advertised currently 
on Glassdoor, Indeed, [ and] Linkedln" and for which he claims he is "qualified to facilitate their cross­
border dealings and expansion within Latin America."3 The Petitioner further stated that his undertaking 
involves: 
• U.S. job creation through the export of U.S. goods and services 
• Minimizing risk exposure within Brazil 
• Facilitating the execution of projects by helping navigate Brazilian bureaucracy and the legal 
system 
• Facilitating the acquisition of appropriate licenses and permits including fast tracking 
• Access to an extensive collection of key contacts within public office enabling fluidity of 
procedures and minimizing unwarranted obstructions 
• Lobbying with government institutions/entities/authorities to identify opportunities for U.S. 
corporate investment 
• Contribut[ing] to market research for major U.S. investments regarding public law in Brazil 
In addition, the Petitioner presented his business plan for .__ ____________ ___,' which 
states that the company will provide "consulting and legal advice, with expansion to the market of the 
structuring of international operations in the United States. The services offered by I I 
include the analysis of the legal conditions for the internationalization of companies and the realization 
2 See Dhanasar, 26 T&N Dec. at 888-91, for elaboration on these three prongs. 
3 The Petitioner's list of prospective companies included Shell Oil, Microsoft, Cleary Gottlieb, Amazon, Norton Rose 
Fulbright, RBC Bank, International SOS, Citibank, TD Financial Solutions, Morgan Stanley, and KPMG. He indicated 
that the positions for which he intends to apply within these companies include foreign legal consultant, foreign legal 
advisor, international business development consultant, and international legal advisor. As the Petitioner is applying for a 
waiver of the job offer requirement, it is not necessary for him to have a job offer from a specific employer. However, we 
will consider information about his prospective positions to illustrate the capacity in which he intends to work in order to 
determine whether her proposed endeavor meets the requirements of the Dhanasar framework. 
3 
of a plan of action for risk reduction ." The Petitioner's business plan contains market analyses , 
infonnation about the company 's services , business strategies , financial forecasts and projections , and 
a description of company personnel. With respect to future staffing, the business plan anticipates that 
I jwill have two employees as the company commences its operations . 
His business plan also offers sales projections of $200 ,000 in year one, $250,000 in year two, and 
$300,000 in year three , but he does not adequately explain how these sales forecasts were calculated. 
Furthermore , the record includes a report entitled "Brazil 's Priority Transportation Projects , A 
Resource Guide for U.S. Industry. " This report , which recei ved funding from the U.S. Trade and 
Development Agency , offers guidance for U.S. companies regarding market challenges, entry 
strategies , and business opportunities in Brazil's transportation sectors . Additionall , the Petitioner 
submitted advisory evaluation letters from! I an associate professor at College, 
and I Ian adjunct profe ssor atl I Law School. .__ ___ .... stated that "the 
business environment m Brazil has become increasingly uncertain " due to "political turbulence and 
economic difficulties" and therefore the Petitioner's undertaking will help U.S. companies navigate I 
"the business environment, financial arrangements , and regulatory regimes in Brazil." Likewise , 
I I asserted that the Petitioner 's proposed endeavor stands to "further the national interest of 
improving U.S. businesses by helping them successfully and cost effectively participate in Brazil's 
complex legal system and economy ." Finally, in his appeal brief, the Petitioner offers information 
relating to U.S . and Brazilian trade and investment matters, including statistics for exports , imports , trade 
balances , and investments. The record therefore demonstrates that the Petitioner 's proposed work has 
substantial merit. 
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 endea vor that 
the foreign national proposes to undertake." See Dhanasar , 26 I&N Dec . at 889. In Dhana sar, 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. 
In his appeal brief, the Petitioner asserts that his propo sed endeavor stands to facilitate the improvement 
and growth of U.S. and Brazilian trade and investment transactions , and therefore his undertaking is of 
national importance. He contend s that the cross-border relationship between the United States and Brazil 
and the challenges presented by the Brazilian market show "the national importance and broad effects 
that [his] proposed endeavor would have to the U.S. economy and U.S. business industry ." 
To evaluate whether the Petitioner's propo sed endeavor satisfies the national importance requirement 
we look to evidence documenting the "potential prospective impact" of his work. Whil e the 
Petitioner's statements reflect his intention to provide valuable legal services for his future employe rs 
and clien ts, he has not offered sufficient information and evidence to demon strate that the prosp ective 
impact of his propo sed endeavor rises to the level of national importance. In Dhanasa r 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 . Id. at 893. Here, we conclude the record does not show 
4 
that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor stands to sufficiently extend beyond his future employers or 
his company and its clientele to impact the legal consulting field or the U.S. economy more broadly 
at a level commensurate with national importance. 
Furthermore, the Petitioner has not demonstrated that the specific endeavor he proposes to undertake 
has significant potential to employ U.S. workers or otherwise offers substantial positive economic 
effects for our nation. Specifically , he has not shown that his company 's future staffing levels and 
consulting activity stand to provide substantial economic benefits in Florida or the United States. 
While the sales forecast fo~ I indicates that the company has growth 
potential, it does not demonstrate that benefits to the regional or national economy resulting from the 
Petitioner's undertaking would reach the level of "substantial positive economic effects" contemplated 
by Dhanasar . Furthermore , the Petitioner has not demonstrated that the specific endeavor he proposes 
to undertake has significant potential to employ U.S. workers or otherwise offers substantial positive 
economic effects for our nation. Id. at 890. For instance, he has not offered sufficient evidence that 
.__ _____________ __, would employ a significant population of workers in an 
economically depressed area or that his endeavor would offer Florida or its population a substantial 
economic benefit through employment levels or business activity. Nor has the Petitioner demonstrated 
that any increases in foreign trade and investment attributable to his company's future consulting 
services stand to substantially affect economic activity in Florida or nationally. 4 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 his proposed 
endeavor as required by the first prong of the Dhanasar precedent decision, the Petitioner has not 
demonstrated eligibility for a national interest waiver. Further analysis of his eligibility under the second 
and third prongs outlined in Dhanasar, therefore, would serve no meaningful purpose. 
III. CONCLUSION 
As the Petitioner has not met the requisite first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework, we conclude 
that he has not established he is eligible for or otherwise merits a national interest waiver as a matter 
of discretion. The appeal will be dismissed for the above stated reasons, with each considered as an 
independent and alternate basis for the decision. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
4 The Petitioner has not shown that the U.S.-Brazilian trade statistics he provides on appeal demonstrate that his specific 
endeavor will offer substantial economic benefits to our nation or any particul ar U.S. region. 
5