dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Logistics And Trucking

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: FEB. 26, 2025 In Re: 36609921 
Appeal of Nebraska Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, a logistics/trucking driver and manager, seeks employment-based second preference 
(EB-2) immigrant classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree or an 
individual of exceptional ability in the sciences, arts or business, as well as a national interest waiver 
of the job offer requirement attached to this classification. See section 203(b)(2) of the Immigration 
and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(2). 
The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers 
(national interest waiver), concluding the Petitioner had not established his eligibility for the 
underlying EB-2 classification as an advanced degree professional or as an individual of exceptional 
ability and did not address whether the Petitioner had established that a waiver of the required job 
offer, and thus of the labor certification, would be in the national interest. The Director then dismissed 
the Petitioner's combined motions to reopen and to reconsider. The Director subsequently granted his 
second combined motions to reopen and to reconsider and issued a request for evidence. Upon review 
of the evidence, the Director again denied the petition, concluding that while the Petitioner had 
demonstrated he was an advanced degree professional, he had not established his eligibility for a 
national interest waiver of the job offer requirement attached to this classification. 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 apreponderance of the evidence. 
Matter of Chawathe, 25 l&N Dec. 369, 375-76 (AAO 2010). We review the questions in this matter 
de nova. Matter of Christo 's, Inc., 26 l&N Dec. 537, 537 n.2 (AAO 2015). Upon de nova review, 
we will dismiss the appeal. 
I. LAW 
To qualify for a national interest waiver, a petitioner must first show eligibility 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. 
If a petitioner establishes eligibility for the underlying EB-2 classification, they must then demonstrate 
that 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 l&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. 
Id. 
II. ANALYSIS 
A. EB-2 Classification 
The Director determined, without explanation, that the Petitioner has established he is an advanced 
degree professional. We disagree. In order to meet the requirements of a member of the professions 
holding an advanced degree, a petitioner must establish they are both a "member of the professions" 
and "hold[] an advanced degree." 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(1); see generally 6 USCIS Policy Manual 
F.5{A){1), https://www.uscis.gov/policymanual (providing, as guidance, requirements for establishing 
one is an advanced degree professional or the equivalent); Matter of Shin, 11 l&N, Dec. 686, 688 
(Dist. Dir. 1966) (noting that the mere acquisition of a degree alone does not qualify a person as a 
member of a profession). A profession is one of the occupations listed in section 101(a)(32) of the 
Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(32), as well as any occupation for which a U.S. baccalaureate degree or its 
foreign equivalent is the minimum requirement for entry into the occupation. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2). 
The intended occupation through which the person plans to advance the proposed endeavor must meet 
the definition of a profession. See Matter of Dhanasar, 26 l&N Dec. at 891, 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2); 
see generally USCIS Policy Alert PA-2025-03, Second Preference Eligibility for National Interest 
Waiver Petitions 7 (Jan. 15, 2025), https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/policy-manual­
updates/20250115-Employment-BasedNational lnterestWaivers.pdf (providing, as guidance, the 
requirements of a member of the professions holding an advanced degree). 
On his Form 1-140, the Petitioner indicated his intention to work in the United States as a truck driver 
and logistics/trucking manager, under the Standard Occupational Code (SOC Code) 11-3071. In 
support of his petition, the Petitioner submitted printouts from the Department of Labor's 
Occupational Outlook Handbook (Handbook) relating to SOC Codes 53-3031 and 53-3032, which 
describe the truck driving occupation and indicate that the typical entry-level education for this 
occupation is a high school diploma or equivalent. While printouts were not included for SOC Code 
11-3071, our review of the Handbook indicates SOC Code 11-3071 relates to transportation, storage, 
and distribution managers, where the typical entry-level education for the occupation is also a high 
school diploma or equivalent.2 
1 See Flores v. Garland, 72 F.4th 85, 88 (5th Cir. 2023) Uoining the Third, Ninth, Eleventh, and D.C. Circuit Courts in 
concluding that USCIS' decision to grant or deny a national interest waiver is discretionary in nature). 
2 See Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Dep't of Labor, Occupational Outlook Handbook, Transportation, Storage, and 
D istri bution Manage rs, https://www. b Is.gov/oo h/managem ent/transportati on-storage-and-distributi on-managers. htm). 
2 
Because the Petitioner has not demonstrated that the occupation of logistics/trucking manager requires 
a U.S. baccalaureate degree or foreign equivalent as "the minimum requirement for entry into the 
occupation," we withdraw the Director's conclusion that the Petitioner is amember of the professions 
as defined at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(1)-(2). 
In the record before the Director, the Petitioner also claimed that he qualifies for EB-2 classification 
as an individual of exceptional ability. However, the most recent decision by the Director did not 
analyze this issue. Because we conclude below that the Petitioner is not eligible for a discretionary 
waiver of the job offer requirement "in the national interest," which is dispositive of this appeal, we 
reserve the issue of whether the Petitioner is an alien of exceptional ability and thereby eligible for the 
underlying EB-2 classification. 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 
alternative issues on appeal where an applicant is otherwise ineligible). 
B. National Interest Waiver 
The Petitioner is a logistics/transportation manager and entrepreneur who intends to work as a truck 
driver and open his own trucking company in the United States. Dhanasar's first prong relates to 
substantial merit and national importance of the specific proposed endeavor. Matter of Dhanasar, 
26 l&N Dec. at 889. The Director determined the Petitioner had established the substantial merit of 
his proposed endeavor but had not established its national importance. In determining whether the 
proposed endeavor has national importance, we consider its potential prospective impact. Id. In 
Dhanasar, we noted that, in assessing national importance, "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 at 890. 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. 
On appeal, the Petitioner asserts the Director did not consider the potential impact of his proposed 
endeavor and relies on his business plan describing the strategies his company intends to implement 
to remain competitive. However, the Petitioner does not explain how his proposed endeavor would 
offer benefits extending beyond his clients to impact the transportation field more broadly. 
Furthermore, we acknowledge that the Dhanasar decision contemplates "[a]n unde1iaking may have 
national importance, for example, because it has national or even global implications within a 
particular field, such as those resulting from certain improved manufacturing processes or medical 
advances." Id. at 893. However, the Petitioner has not established the extent to which his proposed 
endeavor's strategies in, for example, cost management, driver shortage mitigation, supply chain 
challenges, recruitment, differ from or improves upon those already available and in use in the United 
States such that his proposed endeavor would have national or global implications within his field or 
for the United States. 
He also highlights the importance of the transportation industry, the critical role trucking and logistics 
managers play in the industry, and references articles submitted in the record below in support of his 
assertions. However, merely working in an important field or profession is insufficient to establish 
3 
the national importance of the proposed endeavor. See Dhanasar, 26 l&N Dec. at 889 (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"). 
The Petitioner further asserts that his proposed endeavor has significant potential to employ U.S. 
workers and has other substantial positive economic effects, particularly in an economically distressed 
area. He states, for example, that his company wi 11 reach atotal number of 77 employees by year five, 
with payroll expenses to increase to over four million and that over 50 % of the employees will be 
U.S. residents from economically distressed areas of New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and 
Connecticut, including veterans. However, the Petitioner did not present supporting evidence 
corroborating these assertions and projected figures in the record below or on appeal. Moreover, the 
Petitioner did not demonstrate how his company's claimed revenue and employment projections, even 
if supported, would provide substantial economic benefits to the mentioned areas or the U.S. economy 
at a level commensurate with national importance. 
The Petitioner also asserts that his endeavor will contribute to the U.S. economy through community 
involvement, such as, providing donations, starting acommercial driver license school, and organizing 
cleanliness drives. However, the Petitioner does not provide details on appeal or in his business plan 
of, for example, the type and amount of donations to demonstrate broader implications of his proposed 
endeavor. 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. 
Similarly, the record here does not show through supporting documentation how the Petitioner's 
endeavor of opening up a commercial driving school would extend beyond his trainees to impact the 
field or the U.S. economy more broadly at a level commensurate with national importance. 
For these reasons, the Petitioner has not demonstrated that, beyond the limited benefits provided to his 
prospective clients, the Petitioner's proposed endeavor has broader implications in the transportation 
field or that it has the significant potential to employ U.S. workers or has other substantial positive 
economic effects, particularly in an economically depressed area for instance, rising to the level of 
national importance. 
Accordingly, the Petitioner has not demonstrated the national importance of his proposed endeavor 
under the first Dhanasar prong, and therefore eligibility for a national interest waiver. The Director 
also determined the Petitioner had not established the second and third Dhanasar prongs. As our 
finding is dispositive of this appeal, we reserve the Petitioner's arguments regarding whether he has 
demonstrated these other eligibility grounds. See INS v. Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. at 25 (stating that 
agencies are not required to make "purely advisory findings" on issues that are unnecessary to the 
ultimate decision); see also Matter of L-A-C-, 26 l&N Dec. at 526 n.7 (declining to reach alternative 
issues on appeal where an applicant is otherwise ineligible). 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
4