dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Marketing

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: MAR. 25, 2024 In Re: 30186571 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, who works in marketing for the financial services industry, seeks classification as a 
member of the professions holding an advanced degree and as an individual of exceptional ability in 
the sciences, arts or business . 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. 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 in July 2022, concluding that the 
Petitioner had not established eligibility for the national interest waiver. The Director did not address 
whether the Petitioner established eligibility for the underlying EB-2 classification. We remanded the 
matter in February 2023, instructing the Director to determine whether the Petitioner is eligible for 
classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree, and to provide a detailed 
analysis to explain why the Petitioner's evidence does not establish eligibility for the national interest 
waiver. 
The Director again denied the petition in July 2023, again concluding that the Petitioner had not 
established eligibility for the national interest waiver. The Director did not make any determination 
regarding the Petitioner's eligibility for classification as a member of the professions holding an 
advanced degree. The matter is now before us on appeal under 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 nova. Matter of Christo 's, Inc., 26 I&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. 
Once a petitioner demonstrates EB-2 eligibility, 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 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. EB-2 CLASSIFICATION 
Initially, the Petitioner claimed eligibility as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree. 
The Director's first decision did not address the Petitioner's eligibility for EB-2 classification. In our 
remand notice, we acknowledged the Petitioner's claim of eligibility as a member of the professions 
holding an advanced degree, but also noted that the Petitioner had not established that her claimed 
master's degree was an academic degree rather than a professional certification. We instructed the 
Director to "consider whether ... the Petitioner has obtained the equivalent of an advanced degree 
within the meaning of 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(i)(A) or has othe1wise established eligibility for the 
underlying visa classification as an advanced degree professional or an individual of exceptional 
ability." 
The Director's second decision does not include any determination regarding the Petitioner's claim to 
be a member of the professions holding an advanced degree. On appeal, the Petitioner notes this 
omission, and also claims to qualify as an individual of exceptional ability in the sciences, the arts, or 
business. The Petitioner does not discuss this new claim in any detail. 
The Director erred by not deciding the issue of the Petitioner's eligibility for EB-2 classification. But 
because the Director identified another ground for denial with which we agree, it would serve no 
constructive purpose for us to remand the matter for the Director to make a determination on the 
underlying EB-2 classification. We therefore reserve this issue. 2 
III. NATIONAL INTEREST WAIVER 
The only issue in the Director's second decision 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 
Director determined that the Petitioner had established the substantial merit of her proposed endeavor, 
and that she is well positioned to advance that endeavor, but she had not established the national 
1 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). 
2 See INS v. Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. 24, 25-26 ( 1976) (stating that, like courts, federal agencies are not generally required 
to make findings and decisions unnecessary to the results they reach); see also Matter olL-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). 
2 
importance of the proposed endeavor and had not shown that, on balance, the United States would 
benefit from waiving the job offer requirement. 
In her native Brazil, the Petitioner earned a bachelor's degree in social communications in 1995, and 
in 2013 she completed a program which, she asserts, resulted in a degree equivalent to a master's 
degree in business administration. From 1999 to 2006, the Petitioner was a planning manager and 
account director for a marketing agency where she "planned and executed strategic marketing 
campaigns for" various clients, mostly in the financial industry. She then worked as a marketing 
manager, first for a bank from 2006 to 2013, then for a shopping center from 2014 to 2016, and finally 
for another bank from 2016 to 201 7. Since 2018, the Petitioner has spent most of her time in the 
United States as an F-1 nonimmigrant student. She filed the petition in September 2020. 
The first Dhanasar prong, 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. Matter ofDhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. We look for broader implications. An 
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 889-890. 
The Petitioner must establish the national importance of the specific proposed endeavor; it cannot 
suffice for the Petitioner to establish the overall importance of a particular subject, occupation, or field. 
The term ''endeavor" is more specific than the general occupation; a petitioner should offer details not 
only as to what the occupation normally involves, but what types of work the person proposes to 
undertake specifically within that occupation. See, generally, 6 USCJS Policy Manual F.5(D)(l), 
https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual. 
In discussing the national importance of the proposed endeavor, the Director described and quoted 
from several documents in the record and concluded that these materials establish "the proposed 
endeavor's substantial merit (which is not in question) and not ... its national importance." The 
Director also stated: "the petitioner has not shown her proposed endeavor in this case stands to 
sufficiently extend beyond an organization and its clients or the individuals the beneficiary would 
serve to impact the industry or field more broadly." The Director acknowledged the evidence about 
the Petitioner's overall field, but concluded that the Petitioner had not established the national 
importance of her specific proposed endeavor. 
The Petitioner, on appeal, contends that the Director still has not fully considered the Petitioner's 
assertions regarding the national importance of the proposed endeavor. We will discuss the proposed 
endeavor here. 
The Petitioner offered this description of her proposed endeavor: 
I will provide strategic marketing and data analytics consulting services to companies 
in the financial services sector to enable them to better provide critical financial 
services to customers throughout the country and world and to design tailored 
3 
marketing campaigns designed to deliver to consumers financial products they need. 
. . . I will use my expertise in the financial services sector to help financial institutions 
of all sizes understand data and consumer behavior and then to design strategic 
marketing initiatives for companies entering the financial market, ups1zmg, 
downsizing, offering new products, and reaching new customers .... 
I will offer comprehensive strategic marketing consulting services with a focus on data 
analytics to clients in the financial services sector ... to help them understand big data, 
interpret consumer behavior, reach new clients, retain existing clients, increase 
customer engagement, and ultimately succeed in the market following the pandemic. 
The Petitioner stated that she "intends to serve the U.S. financial services sector as it leads the U.S. 
through the economic recovery following the COVID-19 pandemic. Marketing professionals skilled 
in data analytics are urgently needed by the financial services sector to ensure American consumers 
and business[es] have access to critical capital and financial services they need." The Petitioner also 
stated: "Strategic marketing professionals with expertise in data analytics in the financial services 
sector are uniquely positioned to move beyond traditional marketing solutions ... to reach American 
consumers and businesses." These statements address the collective impact of a particular specialty, 
but they do not show that the work of one individual in that specialty has national importance. 
The Petitioner submitted copies of articles and other materials, discussing how the financial services 
industry relies on data analytics for marketing purposes. These materials do not discuss the 
Petitioner's proposed endeavor specifically, or indicate how the work of one marketing consultant has 
national importance in its own right. 
In Matter ofDhanasar, we acknowledged that petitioner's intention to teach university courses and 
mentor middle school students, but we concluded that the petitioner had not shown that he "would be 
engaged in activities that would impact the field of STEM education more broadly." Id. at 893. The 
Petitioner cited this same passage from Matter of Dhanasar in the denial notice, as the Petitioner 
acknowledges on appeal. By the same reasoning, background materials about the overall importance 
of data analytics in the banking industry do not show the national imp01tance of the Petitioner's 
proposed endeavor. 
The Petitioner asserts that the Director did not consider the Petitioner's plans "to provide ... very 
unique big-data-based marketing consulting services to financial and banking organizations," and did 
not acknowledge the details of the Petitioner's proposed endeavor. But the Petitioner does not explain 
why her provision of these services to patticular clients would have broader implications beyond 
benefit to those clients. 
The Petitioner had previously asserted that "her proposed endeavor ... has broad implications within 
the U.S. financial industry [because] her particular expertise ... is crucial to ensure that these 
organizations remain competitive in the global market." The proposed endeavor in Dhanasar involved 
"hypersonic propulsion research," and the petitioner in that case established "the strategic importance 
of U.S. advancement in researching and developing these technologies for use in missiles, satellites, 
4 
and aircraft." Id. at 892. The nature of that research is such that the work of one researcher can be 
directly applied broadly to U.S. defense and aerospace programs. In the present case, the Petitioner 
has not explained how her specific proposed endeavor, which involves customized marketing plans 
based on specific data sets, would impact financial institutions that were not her customers. We agree 
with the Director's determination that the background materials, which discuss the Petitioner's overall 
occupation rather than her endeavor specifically, attest only to the substantial merit of the proposed 
endeavor, not to its national importance. 
The appeal includes a new expert opinion letter from a professor at _______ This letter 
was not part of the record at the time of the denial, and therefore could not have influenced the 
Director's decision. Furthermore, the letter does not explain how the Petitioner's specific proposed 
endeavor has national importance. Instead, the letter states that "the importance of ensuring the 
availability of experts such as [the Petitioner] is clearly national in scope," which refers to the 
collective importance of workers in the Petitioner's field. For these reasons, the new letter is not 
material to the appeal. 
Likewise, newly submitted "articles ... about the importance of data management in marketing for 
the health and growth of banks in the United States" are not material to the appeal because the issue 
is the importance of the specific proposed endeavor, rather than the overall importance of the type of 
work that the Petitioner intends to undertake. The Petitioner must establish the national importance 
of her specific endeavor, rather than that of her occupation as a whole. 
The Petitioner has not shown that, or explained how, her provision of marketing services to a limited 
number of clients has broader implications that rise to the level of national importance. 
In light of the above conclusions, the Petitioner has not met her burden of proof to show that her 
proposed endeavor has national importance as required by the first prong of the Dhanasar national 
interest test. Detailed discussion of the remaining prongs cannot change the outcome of this appeal. 
Therefore, we reserve argument on the other prongs. 
IV. CONCLUSION 
The Petitioner has not established the national importance of the proposed endeavor. Therefore, the 
Petitioner has not shown eligibility for the national interest waiver, and we will dismiss the appeal as 
a matter of discretion. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
5