dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Logistics And Supply Chain Management

Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Date: SEPT. 26, 2023 In Re: 29060597 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, a logistics and shipping manager and an entrepreneur in the logistics and supply chain 
management field, seeks employment-based second preference (EB-2) 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 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 established 
he was an advanced degree professional, but had not demonstrated 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 l&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 because the Petitioner has not established that his endeavor has national 
importance and thus, does not meet the first prong of the Dhanasar framework. 
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. 
"Advanced degree" means any U.S. academic or professional degree or a foreign equivalent degree 
above that of baccalaureate. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2). A U.S. baccalaureate degree or a foreign 
equivalent degree followed by five years of progressive experience in the specialty shall be considered 
the equivalent of a master's degree. Id. 
Once a petitioner demonstrates eligibility for the underlying classification, 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 U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration Services (USCIS) may, as matter of discretion 1, grant a national interest waiver if 
the petitioner demonstrates that: 
• 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 
A. EB-2 Visa Classification 
The Director determined that the Petitioner is a member of the professions holding an advanced degree. 
However, upon de novo review, we disagree. 
In addition to the definition of "advance degree" provided at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2), the regulation at 
8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(i)(B) provides that a petitioner present "[a]n official academic record showing 
that the alien has a United States baccalaureate degree or a foreign equivalent degree, and evidence in 
the form ofletters from current or former employer(s) showing that the alien has at least five years of 
progressive post-baccalaureate experience in the specialty." Although the Petitioner provided a copy 
of his U.S. bachelor's degree in management and business, he did not submit official transcripts. 
Further, while he also included letters of recommendation from colleagues, they 1) are not from former 
or current employers, 2) do not include specific dates of employment, and 3) do not indicate whether 
the employment was full-time. As such, the letters do not meet the requirements of 8 C.F.R. 
§ 204.5(k)(3)(i)(B). Therefore, the Petitioner has not established eligibility for the EB-2 classification 
as an advanced degree professional and we withdraw the Director's finding on this issue. 
B. National Interest Waiver 
The 
Petitioner proposes to continue his career in the United States as a logistics and shipping manager. 
He further states that he plans to start his own business in logistics to help companies with 
"international logistics, shipping, imports and exports, chartering, wholesaling, freighting, 
transportation of goods, and other related areas in the logistics industry." 
The first prong of the Dhanasar framework, 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. Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. 
1 See also Poursina v. USC1S. 936 F.3d 868 (9th Cir. 2019) (finding USCIS' decision to grant or deny a national interest 
waiver to be discretionary in nature). 
2 
In her decision, the Director determined that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor is of substantial merit, 
and we agree. Turning to the national importance of his endeavor, the Director concluded that the 
Petitioner did not establish that his proposed endeavor has national importance. 
On appeal, the Petitioner contends that the Director did not give due regard to his resume; business 
plan; letters of recommendation; and industry reports and articles. In addition, the Petitioner relies, in 
part, on his over 20 years of experience in logistics and supply chain management to establish the 
national importance of his proposed endeavor. However, the Petitioner's expertise and record of 
success in previous positions are considerations under Dhanasar' s second prong, which "shifts the 
focus from the proposed endeavor to the foreign national." Id. at 890. The issue here is whether the 
Petitioner has demonstrated, by a preponderance of the evidence, the national importance of his 
proposed work. 
We have reviewed the staffing and revenue projections in the submitted business plan, which project 
that the company will directly employ 40 full-time and part-time employees within five years and, 
during that period, cumulatively pay wages of $4. 70 million and generate $8.10 million in revenue. 
Importantly however, these employment and revenue projections are not supported by details showing 
their basis or an explanation of how they will be realized, nor do they demonstrate a significant 
potential to either employ U.S. workers or to substantially impact the regional or national economy. 
Specifically, the record does not support that the direct creation of 40 additional full-time and part­
time jobs in this sector or the expected revenue generated by the company will have a substantial 
economic benefit commensurate with the national importance element of the first prong of the 
Dhanasar framework. 
In addition, the Petitioner states in his business plan that he intends to "help to fuel small business 
growth in historically underutilized business zones" in the cities o±i I 
The accompanying business plan indicates his company will open branches in "selected HUBZones" 
in these cities but does not further elaborate on these plans. 2 The Petitioner has not offered sufficient 
evidence that his business, which had not yet been incorporated or secured physical premises, will 
have offices in one or more HUBZones. Moreover, the Petitioner has not provided evidence that the 
areas where his company intends to operate are economically depressed, that it would employ a 
significant population of workers in those areas, or that his endeavor would offer a region or its 
population a substantial economic benefit through employment levels, business activity, or related tax 
revenue. 
We also reviewed the Petitioner's letters of recommendation. The authors praise the Petitioner's 
abilities in the logistics and supply chain management industry and the personal attributes that make 
him an asset to the workplace. While they evidence the high regard the Petitioner's professional 
acquaintances have for him and his work, none of them offer persuasive detail concerning the impact 
of his proposed endeavor or how such impact would extend beyond his clients. As such, the letters 
are not probative of the Petitioner's eligibility under the first prong of Dhanasar. 
2 Under the HUBZone program, the U.S. government seeks to fuel small business growth in historically underutilized 
business zones, with a goal of annually awarding at least 3% of federal contract dollars to HUBZone-certified companies 
annually. See "HUBZone Program," https://www.sba.gov/federal-contracting/contracting-assistanceprograms/hubzone­
program. 
3 
Moreover, the Petitioner emphasized the importance of business development professionals in every 
type of business and submitted industry reports and articles discussing immigrant entrepreneurship 
and the benefits of international investment. However, in determining national importance, the 
relevant question is not the importance of the industry or profession in which the individual will work; 
instead, we focus on "the specific endeavor that the foreign national proposes to undertake." See 
Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. We farther 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. While the Petitioner proposes 
to work in an important industry or field, this is not necessarily sufficient to establish the national 
importance of the specific proposed endeavor. Further, the articles and reports do not discuss any 
particulars of the Petitioner's proposed endeavor or its prospective impact rising to the level of national 
importance. 
In Dhanasar, we determined 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. Likewise, the 
Petitioner has not established how providing his service as a logistics and shipping manager in the 
logistics and supply chain management field stands to sufficiently extend beyond his clients to impact 
the field more broadly at a level commensurate with national importance. 
Because the Petitioner has not established eligibility under the first prong of the Dhanasar test, we 
need not address his eligibility under the remaining prongs, and we hereby reserve them. 3 The burden 
of proof is on the Petitioner to establish that he meets each eligibility requirement of the benefit sought 
by a preponderance of the evidence. Matter of Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. at 375-376. The Petitioner 
has not done so here and, therefore, we conclude that he has not established eligibility for a national 
interest waiver as a matter of discretion. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
3 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 of L-A-C-, 26 l&N Dec. 516. 526 n.7 (BIA 
2015) ( declining to reach alternate issues on appeal where an applicant is otherwise ineligible). 
4