dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Marketing

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: NOV . 20, 2023 In Re: 28880762 
Appeal of Nebraska Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, a marketing consultant, seeks second preference immigrant classification as a member 
of the professions holding an advanced degree and as an individual of exceptional ability, as well as a 
national interest waiver of the job offer requirement attached to this EB-2 immigrant classification . 
See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 203(b)(2), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(2). 
The Director of the Nebraska Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the Petitioner did not 
qualify for the EB-2 classification and had not established 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 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 as either a member of the professions holding an advanced 
degree or an individual of exceptional ability, 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 (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: 
1 See also Poursina v. USCIS, 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). 
• The proposed endeavor has both substantial merit and national importance; 
• The individual is well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor; and 
• On balance, waiving the requirements of a job offer and a labor certification would benefit the 
United States. 
II. ANALYSIS 
For the reasons discussed below, we agree with the Director that the Petitioner has demonstrated 
substantial merit but not the national importance of her proposed endeavor under the first prong of the 
Dhanasar analytical framework. 2 
The Petitioner indicated on Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers, that her proposed 
employment is a marketing consultant. In the initial filing, the Petitioner described her proposed 
endeavor as working "as a design and marketing specialist, [ specializing] in consumer behavior" and 
developing marketing programs for small businesses. The Petitioner did not provide further details 
on the type of companies that she intended to work with, nor did she specify a geographic location in 
which she would work. Instead, the Petitioner reiterated that she "would like to continue to provide 
her design and marketing expertise to companies within the United States" and "bring her unique 
combinational knowledge in design, consumer behavior, and retail experience to a company within 
the U.S." The Petitioner's personal statement summarized her previous work experience and 
described her commitment to the field of marketing but did not address her specific proposed endeavor. 
The Director stated in the request for evidence (RFE) that the Petitioner did not provide a detailed 
description of her proposed endeavor or sufficient documentary evidence demonstrating the 
endeavor's substantial merit and national importance. In response to the RFE, the Petitioner clarified 
that her endeavor is to operate her own marketing agency, I I The Petitioner also 
introduced a business plan stating that her company will "provide a variety of tailored, professional 
digital and traditional marketing services to small- and medium-sized U.S. businesses" and its first 
office will be established inl Iwith additional offices opening inl I 
The first prong, substantial merit and national importance, focuses on the specific endeavor that the 
foreign national proposes to undertake. In determining whether the proposed endeavor has national 
importance, we consider its potential prospective impact. Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. 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. 
On appeal, the Petitioner claims national importance of her endeavor as an entrepreneur by reprising 
the financial and staffing projections previously included in the business plan. The Petitioner asserts 
that the Director "did not fully analyze the provided evidence of [the Petitioner's] business plan" and 
"did not consider all the benefits of [the Petitioner's] endeavor including the creation of direct and 
indirect jobs, revenue growth for small and medium-sized businesses, and the increase in paid taxes." 
2 The Director also concluded that the Petitioner did not establish eligibility under the second or third prong of Dhanasar. 
2 
We reviewed the Petitioner's business plan. The business plan makes various projections that the 
company will purportedly achieve in five years, such as paying $672,135 in taxes to the U.S. 
government, increasing direct sales of marketing consulting services from $202,800 to $1,248,000, 
and providing a total payroll of $741,330 through hiring 13 employees. However, the plan does not 
provide sufficient detail of the basis for these projections, or adequately explain how these sales and 
staffing targets will be realized. The Petitioner must support his assertions with relevant, probative, 
and credible evidence. See Matter of Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. at 376. The business plan alone does 
not sufficiently show that the Petitioner's company will have an impact on the marketing industry or 
the U.S. economy at a level commensurate with national importance. In addition, the record does not 
indicate that the location of the business and its proposed operations is an economically depressed 
area. 
The Petitioner also submitted offers of employment from three different companies. However, the job 
offers do not show that working as a marketing specialist for any of these companies would reach the 
level of "substantial positive economic effects," as contemplated in Dhanasar. Dhanasar, 26 I&N 
Dec. at 890. The offer letters do not corroborate the nature or numerosity of clients or clients' projects 
to support the claims that the Petitioner's work as a marketing consultant or specialist will have 
substantial economic impact beyond the clients or employers that she will serve. 
With the appeal, the Petitioner submits as evidence an article on entrepreneurs and their impact on 
economic growth. The record also contains numerous articles and reports on the importance of 
marketing and digital marketing, the value of small businesses, the impact of COVID-19 on 
advertising and marketing campaigns, and shortage of marketers. 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 "the specific endeavor that the foreign national proposes 
to undertake." Id. at 889. We acknowledge the importance of entrepreneurship as well as the value 
of marketing industry and marketing careers, but these articles do not address specific evidence of 
benefits and advances her proposed endeavor will make in the marketing field. 
In Dhanasar, we also 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, such as those resulting from certain improved manufacturing 
processes or medical advances." Id. The record contains work experience letters and recommendation 
letters from her co-workers, friends, and family members. Much of this evidence shows the 
Petitioner's accomplishments in her past employment or her expertise in marketing. We find that 
these letters are insufficient in describing the Petitioner's specific future endeavor and its broad impact 
on the marketing industry. In addition, the Petitioner's knowledge, skills, and experience in the field 
relate to the second prong of the Dhanasar framework, which "shifts the focus from the proposed 
endeavor to the foreign national." Id. at 890. 
The Petitioner submitted an expert opinion that includes an anal sis of the national importance of the 
Petitioner's proposed endeavor. However, L-...r-----, ________ __J an adjunct associate 
professor of marketing and management at.__ _ _. University, generally discusses the global 
management consulting market and the importance of marketing in the economy, instead of addressing 
the Petitioner's specific endeavor. I I further states: "it is critical for U.S. companies 
doing business or planning to do business abroad to benefit from [the Petitioner's] expertise as a 
3 
marketing professional, with an intimate and first-hand knowledge of the Brazilian business arena." 
However, the Petitioner has not stated, either in her personal statements or letters through her counsel 
that her proposed endeavor includes collaborative works between U.S. and Brazilian companies, or 
that she actively targeting U.S. companies that does business or plans to do business in Brazil. Where 
an opinion is not in accord with other information or is in any way questionable, we may discount or 
give less weight to that evaluation. See Matter ofSea, Inc., 19 I&N Dec. 817, 820 (Comm'r 1988). 
In Dhanasar, 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. The Petitioner 
has repeatedly made broad assertions that her endeavor "will expand the American workforce by 
creating jobs and contributing to the training of other U.S. professionals, while generating revenue for 
U.S. companies," but the record lacks sufficient information or evidence regarding any projected U.S. 
economic impact attributable to her future work as a marketing consultant or specialist. Accordingly, 
we find the record does not establish the Petitioner's proposed work is of national importance. 
Because the Petitioner has not met the first prong of the Dhanasar's analytical framework, we decline 
to reach whether she meets the remainder of the second and third prongs under the Dhanasar 
framework. It is unnecessary to analyze any remaining independent grounds when another is 
dispositive of the appeal. Furthermore, as we find that the record does not establish that the Petitioner 
merits a national interest waiver, we reserve our opinion regarding whether the Petitioner satisfies the 
second-preference eligibility criteria and decline to address the Petitioner's arguments raised on appeal 
regarding this issue. 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"); 
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). 
III. CONCLUSION 
As the Petitioner has not met the requisite first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework, we find 
that she has not established he is eligible for or otherwise merits a national interest waiver as a matter 
of discretion. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
3 With the appeal, the Petitioner submitted three articles on the role of psychology in the workplace and the marketing 
field, but we will not evaluate these articles as they pertain to the issue of the Petitioner's qualification for the EB-2 
classification which we will reserve on appeal. 
4