dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Marketing

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: NOV. 18, 2024 In Re: 34886332 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner seeks employment-based second preference (EB-2) immigrant classification as an 
advanced degree professional, 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 although the Petitioner 
is an advanced degree professional, he did not establish 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 
pursuant to 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 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 eligibility for the underlying classification, the petitioner must then establish 
eligibility for a discretionary waiver of the job offer requirement "in the national interest." Id. 
While neither the statute nor the pertinent regulations define the term "national interest," Matter of 
Dhanasar, 26 l&N Dec. 884 (AAO 2016), provides the framework for adjudicating national interest 
waiver petitions. Dhanasar states that U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) may, as a 
matter of discretion, 1 grant a national interest waiver if the petitioner demonstrates that: 
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in an unpublished decision) in concluding that USCIS' decision to grant or deny a national interest waiver is discretionary 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). 
• 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. at 889. 
II. ANALYSIS 
The Petitioner filed this petition on July 13, 2023. After analyzing the initial evidence, the Director 
issued a request for evidence (RFE), noting the deficiencies in the record and provided the Petitioner 
a non-exhaustive list of evidence he could submit to satisfy his burden. The Petitioner timely 
responded, and the Director denied the petition concluding that although the Petitioner is eligible for 
EB-2 classification as an advanced degree professional, he did not establish that a waiver of the job 
offer, and labor certification requirement, is in the national interest because he did not meet any of the 
Dhanasar prongs. On appeal, the Petitioner contests the Director's determination and asserts he meets 
all three of the Dhanasar prongs. 
Upon de novo review, we agree with the Director's determination that the Petitioner qualifies for 
classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree. As such, the only remaining 
issue is whether the Petitioner's endeavor meets the Dhanasar framework for a discretionary national 
interest waiver. 
The first Dhanasar prong, substantial merit and national importance, focuses on the specific endeavor 
that the individual proposes to undertake and its "potential prospective impact." Matter ofDhanasar, 
26 I&N Dec. at 889. An endeavor's merit may be demonstrated in a range of areas such as business, 
entrepreneurialism, science, technology, culture, health, or education. 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 USCIS Policy Manual F.5(D)(l), https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual. 
For example, while engineering is an occupation, the explanation of the proposed endeavor should 
describe the specific projects and goals, or the areas of engineering in which the person will work, 
rather than simply listing the duties and responsibilities of an engineer. Id. 
In concluding that the Petitioner did not establish the substantial merit of his endeavor, the Director 
determined that the Petitioner's focus is "clearly different" than business and entrepreneurialism. We 
disagree. In his initial personal statement, the Petitioner explains that his endeavor is to "advance my 
career in the United States, in the marketing, branding, communication, media, and business fields, 
working as a Marketing Executive or in a similar high-level position." The Petitioner further explains 
that he intends to use his experience as a market development executive to assist multimedia 
companies, marketing agencies, businesses and individuals "looking to expand their businesses in the 
United States." The Petitioner's statement describing his proposed endeavor, along with additional 
evidence describing the importance of the marketing field to businesses in the United States, are 
sufficient to establish his proposed endeavor has substantial merit as contemplated in Dhanasar. 
In concluding that the Petitioner did not establish his endeavor is of national importance, the Director 
determined that the Petitioner had not shown that the impact of the proposed endeavor would reach 
2 
beyond his "clients at a business where he intends to work." The Director considered the industry 
reports and articles that the Petitioner submitted to establish the importance of the field of marketing, 
the value marketing professionals bring to their businesses, and the shortage of marketing 
professionals. However, the Director concluded that the Petitioner did not satisfy his burden because 
he "did not offer specific information and evidence to corroborate his assertions that the prospective 
impact of continuing his work and expanding his knowledge and expertise to companies rises to the 
level of national importance." The Director also analogized to Dhanasar and explained that the 
Petitioner had not demonstrated that the proposed endeavor has the potential to impact "the regional 
or national population at a level consistent with having national importance." We agree. 
The Petitioner filed this petition to carry out his proposed endeavor of designing and executing 
multimedia strategies and assisting in the design of custom and integrated multimedia marketing 
programs to support the growth and goals of businesses. To carry out this endeavor, the Petitioner 
states he will seek the following positions: 1) an in-house executive role at major multimedia 
companies, marketing agencies, and businesses with extensive marketing demands; and 2) consulting 
opportunities on a project-by-project basis. The Petitioner asserts that his endeavor is of national 
importance because his marketing campaigns will help U.S. companies globalize and localize by 
making content in different languages, conducting effective marketing research, and hiring local teams 
to lead international campaigns. He also asserts that his endeavor will generate revenue and job 
growth, which in turn enhances U.S. competitiveness through business expansion, foreign direct 
investment, customer engagement, encourage international trade, and promote the survival of small 
and medium sized enterprises. Finally, the Petitioner describes the importance of marketing and 
advertising to the business ecosystem to assert his work on marketing and advertising campaigns will 
influence consumer behavior and create ripple effects through various product and services markets 
and that it will have significant potential to employ U.S. workers through the economic development 
of small businesses, and overall improved business performance. 
The Petitioner's evidence in support of his endeavor's national importance includes: Two personal 
statements, media articles and industry reports, letters of support discussing his past achievements and 
corroborating projections of his future work and contributions, and an expert opinion letter from a 
professor of marketing in the school of business atl I 
Although the Petitioner characterizes the industry reports and articles as demonstrating his endeavor's 
national importance, as the Director noted, these documents do not corroborate the Petitioner's 
assertions. See Matter ofChawathe, 25 I&N Dec. at 375 (standing for the proposition that to determine 
whether a petitioner has met their burden under the preponderance standard, we consider the quality, 
relevance, probative value, and credibility of the evidence). Rather, these articles and reports relate to 
topics such as: the role marketing and branding plays in economic growth and entrepreneurship; 
international trade; doing business in Brazil; the economy in general; and how the COVID-19 
pandemic affected global economies. Id. We agree with the Director that in considering national 
importance, we focus on the "specific endeavor that the [ noncitizen] proposes to undertake." Matter 
of Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. As such, while these documents provide a context in which to 
understand the substantial merit of his endeavor, they do not establish its national importance because 
they do not specifically discuss the Petitioner's endeavor. See Matter of Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. at 
375. Similarly, the expert opinion letter provided discusses the importance of marketing and 
3 
advertising as foundational fields to the consumer world. 2 However, this letter speaks to the 
importance of the marketing and advertising fields but not the Petitioner's actual proposed endeavor 
as required under prong one of the Dhanasar framework. Id. And, the Petitioner did not submit 
sufficient evidence discussing the Petitioner's specific proposed endeavor's potential to impact the 
U.S. economy, job creation, or U.S. trade interests, or the proposed endeavor's potential to exert 
broader implications rising to a level of national importance. Id. Therefore, the Petitioner's does not 
satisfy his burden under prong one of the Dhanasar framework. 
On appeal, the Petitioner asserts that his knowledge and expertise in marketing is relevant and 
probative to not only our prong two analysis, but also prong one because his "past accomplishments" 
"corroborate[] projections of his future work in the national interest of promoting business 
competitiveness, performance, and growth, job and revenue creation, attraction of [foreign direct 
investment], and the survival and growth of entrepreneurial endeavors." However, as Dhanasar 
makes plain, we consider a petitioner's education, skills, knowledge and record of success in related 
or similar efforts, among other factors, in our second prong analysis, and the Petitioner provides no 
relevant support for his assertion that these factors should be considered in our prong one analysis. 
See Matter ofDhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 890. Next, the Petitioner asserts the Director misconstrued 
his contention regarding the labor shortage of professionals working in his field and asserts on appeal 
that his endeavor addresses a need and demand for marketing services caused by a shortage of qualified 
people in the field. We note here, however, that labor shortages are directly addressed by the U.S. 
Department of Labor through the labor certification process. Thus, a labor shortage is insufficient to 
satisfy his burden to demonstrate his endeavor is of national importance. See Matter ofChawathe, 25 
I&N Dec. at 375. Finally, the Petitioner asserts his evidence corroborates and supports that his 
endeavor will generate "substantial positive economic effects." However, the Petitioner has not 
provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the impact of his endeavor will lead to such a result. 
Id. In sum, the Petitioner's national importance assertions are not supported by the articles, industry 
reports, or work experience letters, he provides. Id. 
Because a petitioner must establish that they meet all three prongs of the Dhanasar framework to 
obtain a national interest waiver, if even one of the prongs is not established, a petitioner is ineligible 
for this waiver. Accordingly, because the Petitioner has not established his eligibility under prong 
one, we decline to reach and hereby reserve the Petitioner's arguments regarding the second and third 
Dhanasar prongs. See INS v. Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. 24, 25 (1976) (noting that "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 I&N Dec. 516, 526 n.7 (BIA 2015) (declining to reach 
alternative issues on appeal where an applicant is otherwise ineligible). 
2 USCIS may, in its discretion, use as advisory opinions statements from universities, professional organizations, or other 
sources submitted in evidence as expert testimony. Matter of Caron Int'l, 19 I&N Dec. 791, 795 (Comm'r. 1988). 
However, USCIS is ultimately responsible for making the final determination regarding a foreign national's eligibility and 
the submission ofletters from experts supporting the petition is not presumptive evidence of eligibility. Id.. see also Matter 
ofD-R-, 25 l&N Dec. 445, 460 n.13 (BIA 2011) ( discussing the varying weight that may be given expert testimony based 
on relevance, reliability, and the overall probative value). 
4 
III. CONCLUSION 
The Petitioner has not established the national importance of his proposed endeavor, and consequently 
that a waiver of the job offer and labor certification process, in the exercise of our discretion, is in the 
national interest. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
5