dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Mathematics And Engineering

MATTER OF S-S-
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: NOV. 1, 2018 
APPEAL OF NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
PETITION: FORM 1-140, IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER 
The Petitioner, a mathematics researcher, electrical engineer, and educator 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). After a 
petitioner has established eligibility for EB-2 classification, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration 
Services (USCIS) may, as matter of discretion, 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. Matter of Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. 884 
(AAO 2016). 
The Acting Director of the Nebraska Service Center denied the Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for 
Alien Worker, finding 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 contends that he is eligible for a national interest waiver under the 
Dhanasar framework. 
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: 
Matter of S-S-
(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 of job 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. 884.1 Dhanasar states that after EB-2 eligibility has been established, 
USCIS may, as a matter of discretion, grant a national interest waiver when the below prongs are 
met. 
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 
1 In announcing this new framework, we vacated our prior precedent decision, Matter of New York State Department of 
Transportation, 22 I&N Dec. 215 (Act. Assoc. Comm'r 1998) (NYSDOT). 
2 
.
Matter of S-S-
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 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 found that the Petitoner qualifies as a member of the professions holding an advanced 
degree. The sole 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 find that the Petitioner has not sufficiently identified or provided 
consistent information and evidence regarding his proposed endeavor. 
With respect to his proposed endeavor, the Petitioner asserted at the time of filing that "he will seek 
employment as full-time faculty at an American university engaging in instruction, research, and 
public service. Additionally, [the] Petitioner will seek out other academic activities including 
funded research, knowledge transfer activities, and community outreach." He further indicated that 
he "intends to obtain employment in one of three fields; Pure Mathematics, Applied and 
Computational Mathematics, and Applied and Theoretical Physics."3 While the Petitioner identified 
various U.S. universities that have "Departments of Mathematics," he did not specifically explain the 
work he proposes to undertake at those universities or provide evidence to support or clarify his 
research plans.4 
The Director issued a request for evidence (RFE) asking the Petitioner to provide "a detailed 
description of the proposed endeavor and why it is of national importance," including supporting 
evidence demonstrating "the endeavor 's potential prospective impact." In response, the Petitioner 
indicates that his plans include research aimed at "solving 14 unsolved problems in Analytic Number 
2 See Dhanasar , 26 l&N Dec. at 888-91, for elaboration on these three prong s. 
3 In part 6 of the Fonn 1-140, under "Basic Information About the Proposed Employment," the Petitioner did not list a 
job title or provide a description of his propos ed work. According to his Form ETA-750B, Statement of Qualifications 
of Alien, the Petitioner is seeking work as a "Professor/Researcher." The information provided on this form indicates 
that the Petitioner ' s last job involved working as "Chief of Advanced Studies and RCS" (Radar Cross Section) for 
from November 1997 until May 2014. The Form ET A-750B does not 
identify any employment experience for the Petitioner after May 2014. 
4 The Petitioner provided a "Per sonal Statement" listing multiple U.S. universities where he believes that he is "qualified 
to take a faculty position" (including University of Texas at Austin, Texas A&M University , and Rice University) , but 
did not provide evidence of any communications with these institutions about potential research or teaching positions or 
other evidence clarifying the nature of the work he propose s to undertake as a faculty member. As the Petitioner is 
applying for a waiver of the job offer requirement, he need not have a job offer from a specific employer. Nevertheless, 
information about the nature of his proposed endeavor is necessary for us to detennine whether it has substantial merit 
and national importance, and whether he is well positioned to advance such an endeavor. 
3 
.
Matter of S-S-
Theory field," and that he intends to continue his "research in the other unsolved problems [such] as 
Beal's conjecture and Riemann's Hypothesis." The Petitioner also contends that he will pursue 
"applied and computational mathematics and engineering including continuing RCS research & 
development. " Furthermore , he discus ses his "plan to do research in Electronic & Control 
Engineering including Automatic Flight Control System (AFCS) for helicopters and airplanes 
(autopilot) in the Aeronautical Design Centers of the U.S." 5 Finally, the Petitioner indicates that he 
intends to seek U.S. patents for his aeronautical systems inventions. While the Petitioner has 
identified a wide variety of possible research topics in areas such as pure mathematics, applied and 
computational mathematics, applied and theoretical physics, aeronautical engineering, and electronic 
and control engineering, the record does not include sufficient information or supporting 
documentation to corroborate which of these varying proposed research areas he will work on in the 
United States , nor has he identified research projects he intends to undertake to advance RCS or 
AFCS development in this country .6 
The Petitioner ' s RFE response includes a letter from ===== , a professor in the Department 
of Electrical and Computer Engineering at stating: "Most RCS work 
will require a security clearance, which may be difficult for [the Petitioner] to obtain. However, 
there are still opportunities to do 'generic' research in RCS and electromagnetic scattering at the 
unclassified level." further indicates that an area in which the Petitioner "could possibly 
contribute is the analysis and simulation of new materials for absorbing electromagnetic waves." 
However, the Petitioner has not articulated whether it is his intent to perform such work or in what 
capacity he would do so. The Petitioner also presents a letter from , a 
professor at and editor-in-chief of asserting: "I 
have known [the Petitioner] since 2008. He has discussed with me many projects and I have had 
many opportunities to communicate with him regarding various subjects." While 
contends that the Petitioner "seeks employment in the field of mathematics and electrical 
engineering," he does not discuss the capacity in which the Petitioner will work in these areas or the 
specific nature of his future U.S. research endeavors. 
The record also contains Wikipedia articles about RCS and Goldbach's conjecture (an unsolved 
number theory problem) , an abstract discussing Ohio State University 's compact RCS measurement 
system, and a "course description " for a RCS Reduction class offered at Georgia Institute of 
Technology. In addition, the Petitioner provides an article entitled "2017 Global aerospace and 
defense industry outlook" forecasting stronger revenue growth in that industry. He also submits 
information from "Forecast International's Aerospace Portal" indicating that the U.S. Department of 
Defense's budget for 2017 was $594.1 billion dollars. The aforementioned documents relating to the 
5 We note that the Petitioner has not presented any communic ations with such organization s or documentation of their 
interest in hiring him. 
6 In Dhanasar, we held that a petitioner must identify "the specific endeavor that the foreign national proposes to 
undertake." Id. at 889. 
7 
notes: "'I have never met [the Petitioner] in person and we have only communicated via email. . . . [The 
Petitioner] has sent me a collection of his publications and accomplishments to review." 
4 
Matter of S-S-
defense industry, however, are not sufficient to demonstrate the national importance of any specific 
intended area of research identified by the Petitioner. 
ln determining national importance, the relevant question is not the importance or the fields or 
industries in which the individual will work: instead we focus on the "the specific endeavor that the 
foreign national proposes to unde11ake." See Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. The record does not 
include sufficiently detailed or consistent information and evidence to demonstrate whether the 
Petitioner's proposed endeavor is to conduct research in pure mathematics, applied and 
computational mathematics, applied and theoretical physics, aeronautical engineering, and/or 
electronic and control engineering. Nor has he identified the RCS or AFCS research projects he is 
proposing to undertake or the capacity in which he intends to pursue those projects in the United 
States. Without additional information and evidence, the Petitioner has not demonstrated that his 
prospective work as a university instructor, mathematics researcher, or electrical engineer otherwise 
stands to have broader implications rising to the level of having national importance. 8 As the record 
does not sufficiently identify or explain the Petitioner's proposed endeavor(s) to demonstrate that it 
meets the first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework, consideration of the remaining prongs 
would serve no meaningful purpose. 
III. CONCLUSION 
As the Petitioner has not met the requisite three prongs set forth in the Dhanasar analytical framework, 
we find that he has not established he is eligible for or otherwise merits a national interest waiver as 
a matter of discretion. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
Cite as Matter ofS-S-, ID# 1714484 (AAO Nov. 1, 2018) 
8 Although the possible activities he listed likely have substantial merit, the Petitioner has not sufficiently identified his 
proposed endeavor and therefore does not meet the first prong of the Dhanasar framework. 
5