dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Marketing And Digital Strategy

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: MAR. 13, 2024 In Re: 30214228 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, a marketing and digital strategist, seeks classification as a member of the professions 
holding an advanced degree. 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, 8 U.S.C. 
§ 1153(b )(2)(B)(i). 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. The Director concluded the Petitioner 
qualified as an advanced degree professional, but further determined that she did not demonstrate her 
eligibility for a national interest waiver. 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 Christa's, Inc. , 26 I&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. 
If a petitioner demonstrates eligibility for the underlying EB-2 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 USCIS may, as 
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 
• 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 
The Petitioner, a native and citizen of Colombia, stated in support of the petition that she worked on 
several "music assessment projects" abroad and that she intended to "bring her skillset to the United 
States to contribute to the American culture and entertainment industry." The Petitioner indicated she 
would "provide artists with digital and marketing strategy insights and strengthen the music business 
industry." She also asserted that her work would benefit the mental wellbeing of U.S. families, 
generate a more inclusive and diversified environment in the U.S. music industry, and enhance the 
country's connection to Latin culture. The Petitioner pointed to submitted articles and reports 
suggesting that music can help individuals cope with social isolation, uncertainty, and hardship, while 
also reducing anxiety and increasing cognitive wellbeing. She further asserted that her proposed 
endeavor would contribute to the development of music platforms and the circulation of Latin musical 
groups at the national and international level. 
The Petitioner pointed to several initiatives on the part of the Biden Administration to promote the arts 
in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, including over $57 million in funding provided by the 
National Endowment for the Arts to 567 arts organizations. She asserted that her proposed endeavor 
in music closely aligns with the interests of the federal government and "supports a crucial facet of 
America culture." The Petitioner further emphasized that the Biden Administration recognized the 
importance of Hispanic culture through a press release and issued an executive order to advance 
diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility in the federal workforce. She noted that her proposed 
endeavor would focus on "creating bridges and significant connections between American and Latin­
American people, creating a diversified and inclusive music sector in the United States." In addition, 
the Petitioner stated that the "Latino-music boom" was beneficial to the U.S. economy, pointing to the 
growth of music streaming platforms, and her commitment to continuing to expand the music 
streaming market in the United States "through the usage of a music streaming platform which can 
meet artists and representatives for musical business purposes at the local stage." In sum, the Petitioner 
indicated that her proposed endeavor was nationally important "because it addresses a matter that has 
been explicitly supported by the U.S. government through numerous regulations and initiatives." 
The Director later issued a request for evidence (RFE) concluding the Petitioner had established that 
her proposed endeavor had substantial merit. However, the Director indicated the Petitioner did not 
demonstrate that her proposed endeavor would have national importance. The Director stated the 
Petitioner did not establish that her proposed endeavor would extend beyond her clients to impact U.S. 
interests or its entertainment industry more broadly. As such, the Director requested that the Petitioner 
submit additional evidence to establish the endeavor's potential prospective impact, such as 
documentation to substantiate how it would have national or global implications in the field, have 
significant potential to employ U.S. workers or have other substantial economic effects, broadly 
in an unpublished decision) in concluding that USCIS' decision to grant or deny a national interest waiver to be 
discretionary in nature). 
2 
enhance societal welfare or cultural or artistic enrichment, or significantly impact a matter that a 
government entity has described as having national importance. 
In response, the Petitioner largely reiterated the same assertions provided in support of the petition. 
However, she did submit an additional description of her proposed endeavor and its national 
importance. The Petitioner pointed to her ten years of experience working in the music industry using 
digital marketing, event production, and brand building and asserted that she could help Latin music 
artists establish productive and culturally rich products in the U.S. market and reach new audiences 
there. She further indicated that she could build bridges for American artists to communicate better 
with Latin audiences, thereby generating economic and cultural impacts. The Petitioner stated that 
her work would be nationally important because it would "contribute to the global competitiveness of 
the music industry, cultural enrichment, social wellbeing, and ultimately the economy through her 
contributions to the music industry sector, specifically relating to Latino artists." In support of these 
assertions, she again pointed to articles and reports discussing how music can promote mental health 
and wellbeing and Biden Administration initiatives to promote the arts and Latin culture. 
As discussed, the Director concluded the Petitioner established that her proposed endeavor had 
substantial merit. However, the Director determined that the Petitioner did not demonstrate the 
national importance of her proposed endeavor. The Director concluded that the Petitioner did not 
sufficiently address how her proposed endeavor, acting as a marketing and digital strategist assisting 
Latin musicians, would extend beyond her clients to impact U.S. cultural interests or the entertainment 
industry more broadly. Likewise, the Director further determined that the Petitioner did not 
demonstrate that her endeavor would broadly enhance social welfare as claimed or lead to substantial 
positive economic effects. 
On appeal, the Petitioner contends that the Director's analysis reflects a misunderstanding of the facts 
and misapplication of the law representing an abuse of discretion. The Petitioner asserts the Director 
did not focus on all the submitted evidence, specifically ignoring how her work would directly address 
national initiatives promulgated by the Biden Administration. The Petitioner further states the 
Director overemphasized that she did not provide probative expert letters to support the national 
importance of her endeavor. The Petitioner contends that the Director imposed novel and arbitrary 
requirements and failed to properly weigh a letter submitted in response to the RFE from the
I IThis letter states that the Petitioner, through her skills and 
experience, could "aid Latin artists in establishing productive and culturally rich products for the U.S. 
market" and that she would have "a vital role to play in supporting the growth and success of our 
artists in the Latino community." The Petitioner asserts that she provided "ample documentation" to 
corroborate "the social and cultural benefits" of her proposed endeavor. 
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." Matter ofDhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. In Dhanasar, we 
further 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. 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. 
3 
at 890. To evaluate whether the Petitioner's proposed endeavor satisfies the national importance 
requirement, we look to evidence documenting the "potential prospective impact" of her work. 
First, on appeal and throughout the record, the Petitioner emphasizes her skills and experience in 
digital marketing and the music industry, stating that this would aid Latin artists in the United States. 
But the Petitioner's knowledge, skills, and experience in her 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 issue here is whether the specific endeavor that she proposes to undertake has national 
importance under Dhanasar's first prong. 
The Petitioner submitted generic and unsupported assertions regarding the potential prospective 
impact of her proposed endeavor. For instance, the Petitioner stated she would "provide artists with 
digital and marketing strategy insights and strengthen the music business industry," but she provides 
little detail on the digital and marketing insights she would provide or the Latin artists she would work 
with in the United States. The Petitioner further asserted that her proposed endeavor would benefit 
the mental wellbeing of U.S. families and generate a more inclusive and diversified environment in 
the U.S. music industry. Although the Petitioner provided articles and reports suggesting that music 
can positively impact mental wellbeing, there is little description or supporting evidence to 
demonstrate that her proposed work with Latin artists in the United States would have a wide-ranging 
national impact on the mental wellbeing of U.S. families or broadly promote the diversification of the 
music industry, where according to the Petitioner, Latin artists already accounted for over $510 million 
in revenue 2022. She further asserted that her proposed endeavor would contribute to the development 
of music platforms, yet there is little explanation or documentation to substantiate how her work would 
impact large music platforms she discussed, such as Apple Music and Spotify, already accounting for, 
according to documentation submitted by the Petitioner, approximately $5.46 billion in revenue 
annually. The Petitioner must resolve ambiguities in the record with independent, objective evidence 
pointing to where the truth lies. Matter ofHo, 19 I&N Dec. 582, 591-92 (BIA 1988). 
In addition, the Petitioner pointed to several initiatives of the Biden Administration to promote the arts 
in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, including over $57 million in funding provided by the 
National Endowment for the Arts. Although we acknowledge this initiative on the part of the Biden 
Administration deals generally with the arts, the Petitioner did not sufficiently explain how her 
proposed endeavor would promote this effort, particularly since she did not assert that she was a 
recipient of this funding. The Petitioner further emphasized that the Biden Administration had 
recognized the importance of Hispanic culture through a press release and issued an executive order 
to advance diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility in the federal workforce. However, again, 
the Petitioner submits little detail as to the specifics of her proposed work in the United States and 
how it would have a national level impact on diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility beyond the 
artists, who have yet to be identified, that she may work with in the United States. We accept the fact 
that the Biden Administration has promoted the arts, the contribution of Latin culture, and diversity 
and inclusion, but the connection to the Petitioner's proposed endeavor is vague given that none of 
these initiatives specifically discuss the promotion of Latin music specifically, even if it were clear 
how her proposed work would impact the music industry on a national level. 
On appeal, the Petitioner states that the Director overemphasized the fact that the Petitioner did not 
provide probative expert letters to support the national importance of her endeavor. We disagree, as 
4 
the Director merely compared the current matter to Dhanasar, controlling law on this matter, and 
emphasized the lack of objective supporting evidence to support the potential national impact of her 
proposed endeavor. The Petitioner also contends that the Director failed to properly weigh a letter 
submitted in response to the RFE from the I I However, 
the referenced letter merely reiterates similar unsupported assertions provided by the Petitioner. For 
instance, the letter stated that the Petitioner's work would "aid Latin artists in establishing productive 
and culturally rich products for the U.S. market" and that she would have "a vital role to play in 
supporting the growth and success of our artists in the Latino community." But as noted by the 
Director, there is little objective evidence to support these ambiguous assertions on the part of the 
Petitioner, such as the artists she would work with, the national level products her proposed endeavor 
would lead to, or the growth in Latin music on a national level that would result from her work. The 
Petitioner asserts that it provided "ample documentation" to corroborate "the social and cultural 
benefits" of her proposed endeavor. We disagree and concur with the Director that she has not 
supported her assertions with relevant, probative, and credible evidence. See Matter ofChawathe, 25 
I&N Dec. at 376. 
The Petitioner has not offered sufficient information and evidence to demonstrate that the prospective 
impact of her proposed endeavor would rise to the level of national importance. 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. Matter ofDhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. 
at 893. As noted by the Director, the record does not show that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor 
stands to sufficiently extend beyond her proposed clientele, even if such clientele were sufficiently 
identified and documented. As such, the Petitioner has not demonstrated that her proposed endeavor 
would have a broad influence commensurate with national importance. 
Because the documentation in the record does not establish the national importance of her proposed 
endeavor as required by the first prong of the Dhanasar precedent decision, the Petitioner has not 
demonstrated eligibility for a national interest waiver. Since this issue is dispositive, we decline to reach 
and hereby reserve the Petitioner's arguments with respect to the second and third prong outlined in 
Dhanasar. See INS v. Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. 24, 25 (1976) (stating that agencies are not required to 
make "purely advisory findings" on issues that are unnecessary to the ultimate decision); see also 
Matter ofL-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 conclude 
that she has not established she is eligible for or otherwise merits a national interest waiver as a matter 
of discretion. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
5