dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Marketing And Education Admissions

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 19697820 
Appeal of Nebraska Service Center Decision 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: JAN. 11, 2022 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker (Advanced Degree, Exceptional Ability, National 
Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, an "admission and marketing director" and a "marketing scholar specialist," seeks 
second preference immigrant classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced 
degree, as well as a national interest waiver of the job offer requirement attached to this EB-2 
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 qualified 
for classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree, but that he had not 
established that a waiver of the required job offer, and thus of the labor certification, would be in the 
national interest. 
On appeal, the Petitioner submits additional evidence and a brief asserting that he is eligible for a 
national interest waiver. 
In these proceedings, it is the petitioner's burden to establish eligibility for the immigration benefit 
sought. Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361. Upon de nova 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 . Because this classification requires that the 
individual's services be sought by a U.S. employer, a separate showing is required to establish that a 
waiver of the job offer requirement is in the national interest. 
Section 203(b) of the Act sets out this sequential framework: 
(2) Aliens who are members of the professions holding advanced degrees or aliens of 
exceptional ability. -
(A) In general. - Visas shall be made available ... to qualified immigrants who are 
members of the professions holding advanced degrees or their equivalent or 
who because of their exceptional ability in the sciences, arts, or business, will 
substantially benefit prospectively the national economy, cultural or 
educational interests, or welfare of the United States, and whose services in the 
sciences, arts, professions, or business are sought by an employer in the United 
States. 
(B) Waiver ofjob offer-
(i) National interest waiver. ... [T]he Attorney General may, when the Attorney 
General deems it to be in the national interest, waive the requirements of 
subparagraph (A) that an alien's services in the sciences, arts, professions, or 
business be sought by an employer in the United States. 
While neither the statute nor the pertinent regulations define the term "national interest," we set forth 
a framework for adjudicating national interest waiver petitions in the precedent decision Matter of 
Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. 884 (AAO 2016). Dhanasar states that after a petitioner has established 
eligibility for EB-2 classification, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) may, as matter 
of discretion 1, grant a national interest waiver if the petitioner demonstrates: (1) that the foreign 
national's proposed endeavor has both substantial merit and national importance; (2) that the foreign 
national is well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor; and (3) that, on balance, it would be 
beneficial to the United States to waive the requirements of a job offer and thus of a labor certification. 
The first prong, substantial merit and national importance, focuses on the specific endeavor that the 
foreign national 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. 
The second prong shifts the focus from the proposed endeavor to the foreign national. To determine 
whether he or she is well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor, we consider factors including, 
but not limited to: the individual's education, skills, knowledge and record of success in related or 
similar efforts; a model or plan for future activities; any progress towards achieving the proposed 
endeavor; and the interest of potential customers, users, investors, or other relevant entities or 
individuals. 
The third prong requires the petitioner to demonstrate that, on balance, it would be beneficial to the 
United States to waive the requirements of a job offer and thus of a labor certification. In performing 
this analysis, USCIS may evaluate factors such as: whether, in light of the nature of the foreign 
national's qualifications or the proposed endeavor, it would be impractical either for the foreign 
national to secure a job offer or for the petitioner to obtain a labor certification; whether, even assuming 
that other qualified U.S. workers are available, the United States would still benefit from the foreign 
1 See also Poursina v. USC1S. 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). 
2 
national's contributions; and whether the national interest in the foreign national's contributions is 
sufficiently urgent to warrant forgoing the labor certification process. In each case, the factor(s) 
considered must, taken together, indicate that on balance, it would be beneficial to the United States 
to waive the requirements of a job offer and thus of a labor certification. 2 
II. ANALYSIS 
The Director determined that Petitioner qualifies as a member of the professions holding an advanced 
degree. The remaining issue to be determined 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. For the 
reasons discussed below, we agree with the Director that the Petitioner has not sufficiently 
demonstrated the national importance of his proposed endeavor under the first prong of the Dhanasar 
analytical framework. 
Regarding his claim of eligibility under Dhanasar' s first prong, the Petitioner initially indicated that he 
intended to continue his career in the education "admissions and marketing process." He stated that his 
proposed endeavor was "focused on getting more and more nationals or American residents to achieve 
their professional and personal goals, thus achieving that the United States obtain professionals prepared 
in different areas of the education, economy, culture and business." 
The Director issued a request for evidence (RFE) asking the Petitioner to provide further information 
and evidence regarding his proposed endeavor in the United States. He was informed that he should 
submit a "detailed description of the proposed endeavor and why it is of national importance." The 
Petitioner was also asked to present documentary evidence that establishes his proposed endeavor's 
national importance. 
In response to the Director's RFE, the Petitioner stated: 
As Director of Admissions and Marketing my effort is not only to comply with the 
requirements established by the Department of Education or by the Government, my effort 
is directed to the benefit of the student (professional and personal objectives), that of the 
education institution (social objectives and economics) in which I am working, society 
and therefore the country in general generating skilled labor, sustained growth of the 
economy and generating new professionals with potential in culture, art and business. 
The Petitioner further indicated that he is currently employed bvl !University and that his 
work involves restructuring "the admission process for the purpose of a tripartite benefit (individual­
society-country)." He explained that his process includes creating concepts for his institution that 
encourage prospective students to engage in "some type of study that will improve their future." In 
addition, the Petitioner asserted that his proposed work is aimed at making students "understand that in 
order to have a better future, academic preparation is important. I am continually looking to create or be 
in those spaces between the community and my admissions department that generate that feeling of 
improvement in the person." The Petitioner also noted that his undertaking involves interviewing student 
prospects and ensuring that enrollment meets their needs. Furthermore, he stated that his work entails 
2 See Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 888-91, for elaboration on these three prongs. 
3 
restructuring the admissions process to benefit prospective students in accordance with "the 
characteristics of the educational institution." Finally, the Petitioner indicated that his proposed endeavor 
includes ensuring that students complete their academic requirements, creating admission forms, and 
serving as a reference for students. 
The record includes a July 2020 letter from the president ofl I University stating that the 
Petitioner has been employed by the university as "an Admission and Marketing Director" since January 
2020. 3 This letter indicates that his responsibilities include establishing "the student recruitment team as 
a center of expertise"; leading "the university's advancement and recruitment teams"; holding "monthly 
department meetings"; advising "students on issues such as course selection, progress towards graduation, 
and career decisions"; participating "in faculty and college committee activities"; and providing 
"appropriate management information relating to [committee] effectiveness and report on their results." 
The Petitioner is also responsible for engaging "networking opportunities to market all aspects of 
admission and enrollment program," "actively support[ing] the university leadership," formulating 
"strategic plans for the admission department," assessing and collecting "tuition and fees," representing 
the "institution at community and campus events," and managing and monitoring the "admission 
department." 
Furthermore, the Petitioner submitted letters of support from graduates of universities where he has 
worked. 4 For example, I I asserted that the Petitioner "developed an event for the 
community that was every Saturday and which I attended and where he invited different quality 
speakers and that within the event he generated a strategy where the participants could understand how 
important it was to strive and have a title from the United States to have a better future." In addition, 
I I stated that the Petitioner participated in a "conference where he in a 
specific way explained in detail ... the benefits that we had from carrying out an academic program 
that allowed me to have personal and professional growth. Immediately I gave him my information 
and set an appointment with him to know more precisely what he could do and at that time he helped 
me with the entire process of admission for the university." Similarly,! 0 I indicated that 
that he met the Petitioner "at the [student] fair and from Colombia through phone calls and by email I 
began the process of admissions. I accompany myself at all times to become an international student, 
when I began my study program he was always there to support me in any situation that presented 
itself" 
Additionally,~-------~stated that the Petitioner contacted him and they "began an 
admission process that lasted approximately 6 months. I remember that the first steps was [sic] to 
carry out all that were formats and interview to be accepted at the university. At all times he was the 
support in all aspects of the process so that . . . I could decide for the Master in Business 
Administration~ (MBA)[ Likewise~--------~ indicated that the Petitioner invited him 
to the campus a University for an explanation of the admissions process~-------~ 
also noted that he graduated from the MBA program, started his professional life, dedicated himself 
to his work, helped his "wife study a special children's program," bought a house, and has "a 
3 As the Petitioner is applying for a waiver of the job offer requirement, it is not necessary for him to have a job offer from 
a specific employer. However, we will consider information about his current position to illustrate the capacity in which 
he intends to work in order to determine whether his proposed endeavor meets the requirements of the Dhanasar analytical 
framework. 
4 While we discuss a sampling of these letters, we have reviewed and considered each one. 
4 
comfortable life." FurtherJ I asserted that the Petitioner explained to him what 
the process was like for pursing a master's degree . .__ _______ ____. also mentioned that the 
most important part of their conversation was "the way in which [ the Petitioner] showed me how I 
could make my equivalence of my professional title and where could I get professionally with doing 
my master in Information Technology." 
The aforementioned letters of support discuss the Petitioner's previous work recruiting students and 
his effectiveness as an admissions director, but they do not address the national importance of his 
proposed endeavor. The Petitioner's knowledge, skills, and experience in his 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 he proposes to undertake 
has national importance under Dhanasar's first prong. 
The record also includes articles discussing the recent decrease in international student enrollment at 
U.S. universities, the recent decline in international student economic value to the United States, and 
the drop in foreign enrollment at U.S. colleges due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Additionally, the 
Petitioner presents a list of 186 students he claims to have enrolled at the universities where he has 
worked. The record therefore supports the Director's determination that the Petitioner's proposed 
work as an admission and marketing director has substantial merit. 
In the decision denying the petition, the Director determined that the Petitioner had not established the 
national importance of his proposed endeavor. The Director stated that the Petitioner's evidence did not 
show that his proposed work stands to have broader implications for the field. In addition, the Director 
indicated that the Petitioner had not demonstrated that his undertaking "has significant potential to employ 
U.S. workers or will have positive economic effects for the United States" at a level indicative of national 
importance. 
In his appeal brief: the Petitioner asserts that his proposed "work in the United States as a Marketing 
Scholar Specialist" is aimed at "procuring the enrollment of a major number of international students as 
possible for the benefit of the United States institutions of higher learning economy." He contends that 
revenues from institutions of higher learning play "a fundamental role in the economy of the United 
States" and that "international students contributed $45 billion to the U.S. economy in 2018." The 
Petitioner also argues that decreased foreign student enrollment at U.S. colleges and universities 
attributable to the COVID-19 pandemic "could spell trouble for the financial health of the nation's higher 
education institutions" and places "thousands of American jobs" at risk. Additionally, he points to U.S. 
travel restrictions and declining international student enrollment and claims that his undertaking involves 
"enrolling foreign students into the national education system for the benefit of the United States higher 
institutions' economy." The Petitioner concludes that his proposed endeavor has national importance 
because it "will help maintain an important sector of the American economy" and preserves "a lot of job 
position[s] currently jeopardized by the present pandemic." 
In determining national importance, the relevant question is not the importance of the field, industry, 
or profession in which the individual will work; instead we focus on the "the specific endeavor that 
the foreign national proposes to undertake." See Dhanasar, 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 
5 
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. 
at 890. 
To evaluate whether the Petitioner 's proposed endeavor satisfie s the national importance requirement 
we look to evidence documenting the "potential prospective impact" of his work. While the 
Petitioner's statements reflect his intention to provide valuable student admission and marketing 
services for his university , he has not offered sufficient information and evidence to demon strate that 
the prospective impact of his proposed endeavor rises 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 . Id. at 893. Here, we conclude the 
record does not show that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor stands to sufficiently extend beyond his 
university and its future students to impact the field or the U.S . economy more broadly at a level 
commensurate with national importance. 
Furthermore, the Petitioner has not demonstrated that the specific endeavor he proposes to undertake 
has significant potential to employ U.S. workers or otherwise offers substantial positive economic 
effects for our nation . Without sufficient information or evidence regarding any projected U.S. economic 
impact or job creation attributable to his future work, the record does not show that benefits to the U.S. 
regional or national economy resulting from the Petitioner's admissions and marketing projects would 
reach the level of "substantial positive economic effects" contemplated by Dhanasar. Id. at 890. 
According ly, the Petitioner 's proposed work does not meet the first prong of the Dhanasar framework. 
Because the documentation in the record does not establish the national importance of his proposed 
endeavor as required by the first prong of the Dhanasar precedent decision, the Petitioner has not 
demonstrated eligibility for a national interest waiver. Further analysis of his eligibility under the second 
and third prongs outlined in Dhanasar , therefore, would serve no meaningful purpose. 
III. CONCLUSION 
As the Petitioner has not met the requisite first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework, we conclude 
that he has not established he is eligible for or otherwise merits a national interest waiver as a matter 
of discretion. The appeal will be dismissed for the above stated reasons , with each considered as an 
independent and alternate basis for the decision. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
6