dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Mechanical Engineering

U.S.Departmentof HomelandSecurity
identifyingdatadeletedto s o
preventc'e nwarramea **"*n 20529-2090
mvas U.S.Citizenship
and Immigration
Services
PUBLICCOPY
Fil E: Office: TEXASSERVICECENTER Date:
NOV2 9 2010
IN RE: Petitioner:
Beneficiary:
PETITION: ImmigrantPetitionfor Alien Workerasa Memberof the ProfessionsHoldinganAdvanced
Degreeor anAlien of ExceptionalAbility Pursuantto Section203(b)(2)of the Immigration
andNationalityAct, 8 U.S.C.§ 1153(b)(2)
ON BEHAl.F OF PETITIONER:
INSTRUCTIONS:
Enclosedpleasefind the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office in your case. All of the documents
related to this matter have beenreturned to the office that originally decidedyour case. Pleasebe advised
thatanyfurtherinquirythatyoumighthaveconcerningyourcasemustbemadeto thatoffice.
If you believe the law was inappropriately applied by us in reaching our decision, or you have additional
information that you wish to have considered,you may file a motion to reconsideror a motion to reopen.
Thespecificrequirementsfor filing sucha requestcanbefoundat 8 C.F.R.§ 103.5.All motionsmustbe
submittedto the office that originally decidedyour caseby filing a FormI-290B,Notice of Appealor
Motion. The fee for a Form 1-290Bis currently $585, but will increaseto $630 on November 23, 2010. Any
appealor motion filed on or after November23, 2010 must befiled with the $630 fee. Pleasebeawarethat 8
C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(1)(i) requiresthat any motion must be filed within 30 daysof the decision that the motion
seeksto reconsideror reopen.
Thankyou,
PerryRhew
Chief,AdministrativeAppealsOffice
www.uscus.gov
Page2
DISCUSSION: TheDirector,TexasServiceCenter,deniedthe employment-basedimmigrantvisa
petition,whichis nowbeforetheAdministrativeAppealsOffice(AAO) onappeal.Theappealwill be
dismissed.
Thepetitionerseeksclassificationpursuantto section203(b)(2)of theImmigrationandNationalityAct
(the Act), 8 U.S.C.§ 1153(b)(2),asan alienof exceptionalability or a memberof the professions
holdinganadvanceddegree.Thepetitioner,a mechanicalengineer,seeksemploymentasa physical
scientist. The petitionerassertsthat anexemptionfrom the requirementof ajob offer. andthusof an
alien employmentcertification,is in the nationalinterestof the United States.The directorfoundthat
thepetitionerqualifiesfor classificationasa memberof theprofessionsholdinganadvanceddegree,
butthatthepetitionerhadnotestablishedthatanexemptionfromtherequirementof ajob offerwould
bein thenationalinterestof theUnitedStates.
On appeal,counselsubmitsa brief andadditionalevidence.While someof counsel'sassertionshave
merit, we uphold the director's ultimate conclusion that the petitioner has not demonstratedhis
eligibility for the classificationsought. The petitioner'smodelingof heattransferin gasturbinesis
notable,particularly his pre-doctoralwork in The petitioner's doctoral work in this area,
however,hasbeenlessinfluential. Moreover,the petitioner'scurrentwork modelingaerosoldeposits
in thehumanlung, unpublishedasof thedateof filing, is too recentfor usto evaluateits potential.
Section203(b)of theAct statesin pertinentpartthat:
(2) Aliens who are membersof the professionsholding advanceddegreesor aliens of
exceptionalability. --
(A) In general.-- Visas shall be madeavailable. . . to qualified immigrantswho are
members of the professionsholding advanceddegreesor their equivalent or who
becauseof their exceptionalability in thesciences,arts,or business,will substantially
benefitprospectivelythe nationaleconomy,cultural or educationalinterests,or welfare
of the United States,and whoseservicesin the sciences.arts,professions,or business
aresoughtby anemployerin theUnitedStates.
(B) Waiverof job offer.
(i) . . . theAttorneyGeneralmay,whentheAttorneyGeneraldeemsit to
bein thenationalinterest,waivethe requirementsof subparagraph(A)
thatanalien'sservicesin thesciences,arts,professions,or businessbe
soughtbyanemployerin theUnitedStates.
ThepetitionerholdsaPh.D.in Engineeringfrom Thepetitioner'soccupation
falls within the pertinentregulatorydefinition of a profession. The petitionerthus qualifiesas a
memberof theprofessionsholdinganadvanceddegree.Theremainingissueis whetherthepetitioner
Page3
hasestablishedthatawaiverof thejob offerrequirement,andthusanalienemploymentcertification,is
in thenationalinterest.
Neitherthestatutenorpertinentregulationsdefinetheterm"nationalinterest."Additionally,Congress
did not provide a specificdefinition of the phrase,"in the nationalinterest." The Committeeon the
Judiciarymerelynotedin its reportto theSenatethatthecommitteehad"focusedon nationalinterest
by increasingthenumberandproportionof visasfor immigrantswhowouldbenefittheUnitedStates
economicallyandotherwise.. . ." S.Rep.No.55,101stCong.,IstSess.,11(1989).
A supplementarynotice regarding the regulations implementing the Immigration Act of 1990
(IMMACT), publishedat56Fed.Reg.60897,60900(Nov.29, 1991),states,in pertinentpart:
The Servicebelievesit appropriateto leavethe applicationof this testasflexible as
possible,althoughclearlyan alien seekingto meetthe [nationalinterest]standardmust
make a showing significantly abovethat necessaryto prove the "prospectivenational
benefit"|requiredof aliensseekingto qualify as"exceptional."] Theburdenwill rest
with the aliento establishthatexemptionfrom, or waiverof, thejob offer will bein the
nationalinterest.Eachcaseis to bejudgedon its own merits.
MatterofNew YorkStateDep't. of Transp.,22 I&N Dec.215,217-18(Comm'r. 1998)(hereinafter
"NYSDOT"), hassetforth severalfactorswhichmustbeconsideredwhenevaluatinga requestfor a
nationalinterestwaiver. First,thepetitionermustshowthatthealienseeksemploymentin anareaof
substantialintrinsic merit. Id at 217. Next, thepetitionermustshowthattheproposedbenefitwill be
nationalin scope.Id Finally,thepetitionerseekingthewaivermustestablishthatthealienwill serve
thenationalinterestto a substantiallygreaterdegreethanwouldanavailableU.S.workerhavingthe
sameminimum qualifications. Id. at217-18.
It must be noted that, while the national interestwaiver hingeson prospectivenational benefit,the
petitionermustestablishthatthealien's pastrecordjustifies projectionsof futurebenefitto thenational
interest. Id. at 219. The petitioner's subjectiveassurancethat the alien will, in the future, servethe
nationalinterestcannotsufficeto establishprospectivenationalbenefit. The inclusionof the term
"prospective"is usedhereto requirefuturecontributionsby the alien,ratherthanto facilitate theentry
of analienwith nodemonstrableprior achievements,andwhosebenefitto thenationalinterestwould
thusbeentirelyspeculative.Id
We concurwith the directorthat the petitionerworks in an areaof intrinsic merit, Computational
Fluid Dynamics (CFD) modeling, and that the proposed benefits of his work, improved
understandingof depositionof cigaretteaerosolsin lungs,would benationalin scope. It remains,
then,to determinewhetherthe petitioner will benefit the national interestto a greaterextentthanan
availableU.S. worker with the sameminimum qualifications.
Page4
Eligibility for the waiver must rest with the alien's own qualifications ratherthan with the position
sought. In other words,we generallydo not accepttheargumentthat a given project is so important
that any alien qualified to work on this projectmust also qualify for a nationalinterestwaiver.
NYSDOT,22 I&N Dec.at 218. Moreover,it cannotsufficeto statethatthe alienpossessesuseful
skills, or a "uniquebackground."Specialor unusualknowledgeor trainingdoesnot inherentlymeet
the national interestthreshold. The issueof whethersimilarly-trained workers are available in the
UnitedStatesis anissueunderthejurisdictionof theDepartmentof Labor. Id at221.
At issueis whetherthispetitioner'scontributionsin thefield areof suchunusualsignificancethatthe
petitioner merits the special benetit of a national interest waiver, over and above the visa
classificationheseeks.By seekinganextrabenefit,thepetitionerassumesanextraburdenof proof.
A petitionermustdemonstratea pasthistoryof achievementwith somedegreeof influenceon the
field asa whole. Id. at 219,n. 6. In evaluatingthepetitioner'sachievements,we notethatoriginal
innovation, such as demonstratedby a patent, is insufficient by itself. Whether the specific
innovationservesthenationalinterestmustbedecidedonacase-by-casebasis./d at221,n.7.
Initially the petitionersubmittedhis 10 publishedarticles. While thesearticlesdeal with CFD
modeling, they addressheat exchangeratherthan aerosoldepositsin the lungs. According to the
petitioner'scurriculum vitae, all of his articleson aerosoldepositswereeitherin preparationor draft
formasof thedateof filing. Thepetitionerdoeslist a conferencepresentationon aerosoldepositson
his curriculumvitae. One of the petitioner'sreferences,M, Chief of the Division of
Surgical Researchat , affirms having met the petitioner at this
conference.
Whilepublicationdemonstratestheexposureof thepetitioner'sworkin thefield,it cannotdemonstrate
the subsequentinnuenceof that work. Initially, the petitioner submittedevidencethat two of his
articleshadgarneredfive citationseachandanotherof his articleshadgarneredthreecitations. None
of thepetitioner'sarticlesgarneredmorethantwo independentcitations.
Counselrelieson the impactfactorof thejournals andthe citationsgarneredby the petitioner'sPh.D.
advisor, as evidenc ber of citatio s ificant in the
etitionersareaof research.Onappeal, aprofessorat
assertsthat even articles by leadingresearchersin CFD mo ing do not generate
significantnumbersof citations.
Thejoumal impactfactorrepresentsan averageof citationsto all of the articlesin a givenjoumal
annually. It doesnot providea useful saugefor determiningthe level of citationsindicativeof an
influentialarticle. Regarding citations,while counselrelieson the averagenumberof
citationsper article. we find it more usefulto look at the level of citationsgarneredby his most
Page5
influentialarticles.1 hasauthoredat least21 articlesthathavegarneredbetween20 and50
citations,oneof which theJournal of Heat Transferpublishedin 2003,just a yearbeforetwo of the
petitioner'scitedarticlesappearedin print. Thisinformationdoesnotsuppor1 assertion
thatinfluentialCFDmodelingarticlesdonotgeneratesignificantcitation.
The petitioner also provided someof the citing articles. The citations themselvesare not notable.
Primarily the authorscite thepetitioner'swork asanexampleof work in thefield anddo not appearto
beapplyingthepetitioner'smodelin theirownwork.
While a small numberof citationsdoesnot precludea finding that the petitionerhasa track recordof
successwith somedegreeof influencein the field, the petitionermust submitother evidencethat is
indicativeof his influence.
The petitioner has submitted evidence that he has reviewed manuscri.ts for the Journal o
Thermophysicsand Heat Transfer. On ornal
assertsthat the journal "selects only professionalswith outstandingqualifications" to review
manuscripts.Wecannotignorethatscientificjournalsarepeerreviewedandrely on manyscientists
to reviewsubmittedmanuscripts.Moreover,thepetitioner'swork for thisjournal doesnot reflecton
hisinfluenceon aerosolmodelingin thehumanlung.
Professor of assertsthathehasbeenfamiliarwith thepetitioner's
namesince1996. assertsthatthepetitioner"developeda body-fittedcoordinateCFD
codeto simulatethe conjugateheattransferin t ' 1plexgeometrychannels"asa teammemberfor
the SpacecraftProject 921. Professor explainsthat the petitionerwas not allowed to
publish theseresults but affirms that the project membersapplied the petitioner's researchin the
developmentof spacecrafts.
Professor further assertsthat the petitioner subsequentlyworked as a researchengineerat the
Instituteof EngineeringThermophysics.Accordingto Professor , the petitioner"developeda
softwarepackageand conductedquantity analysisfor power plant system{s]." Professor
contmues:
Applying the Equivalent Enthalpy Drop (EED) theory, [the petitioner] built and
programmedthe mathematicalmodel and fimishedseveralevaluationsof [the] power
plant. He alsoconductedthethermodynamicsimulationandparameteroptimizationof
modernpower systemby creativelyusing the first and secondthermodynamicslaws.
He performedan advancedoptimizationmethodthe economicindexin powerplants
andfoundthe bestparametersfor powerplantoperation. [Thepetitioner's]research
The only useful comparisonof Dr. Han's averagecitation rate would be to the petitioner's averagecitation
rate,whichwouldneedto takeintoaccountthesevenarticleshehasauthoredthathavenotbeencitedatall.
Page6
results on this project were presentedin severaldomestic conferencesand highly
regardedby [the]Chineseenergycommunityandindustry.
Vice Presidentof the
assertsthatin 2001,theinstitutedevelopedcomputersoftwareto evaluateenergysystemeconomicsin
power plants,incorporatingan energymethodpresentedin oneof the petitioner'sarticles. 4
assertsthatthesoftwareisnowin usein over70powerplantsi . Whilethepetitioner'sworkin
is notable,the petitioneris no longerworking on CFD modelingof gasturbinesor heat
exchange.As such,hemustdemonstratethathis pastwork predictshis futurebenefitto the national
interestthroughmodelingaerosoldepositsin thehumanlung.
discussesthepetitioner'sPh.D.researchat . First, explains
thatthepetitionermodifieda codethatappliedtheprevioussimulationdatato a newsimulationand
reducedcomputationtime for executingCFD simulation. continuesthat the petitioneralso
"investigatedthe largechannelaspectratioandcentrifugalbuoyancyforceseffecton thefluid 00w and
heattransferin the channelwith V-shaperibs." Whil notesthat the petitionerauthoreda
publishedarticleon this subjectandpraisesthepetitioners a i ity m planningandexecutingcomplex
CFDsimulations,hedoesnotexplainhowthisworkhasinfluencedthefield.
.nextaddressestheimpracticalaspectsof testing"the high speedflow athigh rotatingspeedgas
turbines." continues:
[Thepetitioner]performedtheCFDmodelingandrenderedthedifficult experimentsto
be realizedin the computersimulation. [The petitioner]also brilliantly improvedour
in-housesimulationcodeby takingaccountof therotatingeffectin arbitrarycoordinate
system. He appliedtheequationof momentumandReynoldsstresstransportin rotating
frame at curvilinearcoordinatesystemand dramaticallystrengthenedour ability to
simulate very complex rotating conditions. Applying the improved code, [the
petitioner]simulatedthetwo-passchannelwith/without ribs that is very commonin the
rotatinggasturbineandsuccessfullyovercamemanydifficult issues:turbulence,non-
inertiaframe,rib disturbingandbendingchannel.
notesthat the petitionerpresentedthis work andthat theJournal of Heat 7'ransferJublished
thepetitioner'sarticleon this subject.WhileE confirmsthatthis work improved
in-housecode,hedoesnot explainhow this work hashada wider influencein the field of
CFD modeling.
Finally, discussesthe petitioner'swork modelingpin-fin channelsin gasturbines.
assertsthatsimulatinga singlepin-fin in channelis a challengeandthatthepetitioner"performedthe
multiplepin-finsin therotatingframe"by applying"the Multi-blocksGridsandChimeratechniqueto
build the structuredgrid." further assertsthat the petitioner's simulation "showed good
agreement"with experimentaldata. notesthatthepetitioneror a coauthorpresentedthework
Page7
andthatthepetitionerauthoreda publishedarticleonthistopic. Onceagain,while praisesthe
petitioner'sability to succeedin this modelingchallenge,he doesnot explainthe miluenceof this
work.Forexample,hedoesnotidentifyanyotherresearchteamutilizingthepetitionersmodel.
, Headof theDepartmentof EnergySciencesatthe in
, explainsthatheknowsof thepetitioner'swork throughhispublications. asserts
that the petitionerauthoredtwo publishedarticleson his computercodethat cancaptureandtakeinto
accounttherotatingeffectontheturbinetransportin arotatingframe. doesnotsuggestthat
heor anyotherindependentresearchteamis usingthis computercode. furtherassertsthat
the petitioner'suse of the Multi-blocks Grids and Chimeratechniquewas "unprecedented"and
producedresultsthat were in "very good agreement"with the experimentalstudy. Once again,
doesnotsuggestthatheor anyotherindependentresearchteamis usingthistechnique.
assertsthattheU.S.Departmentof Energy(DOE)fundedthepetitioner'sresearch,thatthe
petitionerpresentedthis work to DOEandthat DOE "warmly accepted"thepetitioner'swork. The
recordcontainsno lettersfrom officials at DOE explainingthe department'suseof the petitioner's
modelsandtechniques.Most research,in orderto receivefunding,mustpresentsomebenefitto the
general pool of scientific knowledge. It does not follow that every researcherworking with a
governmentgrantinherentlyservesthe nationalinterestto an extentthatjustifies a waiver of thejob
offer requirement.
, Headof the Departmentof MechanicalandNuclearEngineeri
, assertsthat shemetthepetitionerat a conferencein Nevada. explainsthat
the petitioner'sPh.D. researchareais importantbecauseof the challengeof increasingenergy
efficiencyof gasturbineswhilemaintainingor increasingtheturbinesafetyperformancebycoolingthe
turbine blades. Sheprovidesinformation similar to that discussedabove,assertingthat the petitioner
wasthe first to discover"the characteristicsandrotationnumbersof heattransferenhancementat high
Reynoldsnumbers." Any Ph.D. thesis or postdoctoralresearch,in order to be acceptedfor
graduation,publication or funding, mustoffer new anduseful information to the pool of knowledge.
It doesnot follow that everyresearcherwho performsoriginal researchthat addsto the generalpool
of knowledge inherently servesthe national interest to an extent that justifies a waiver of the job
offer requirement. doesnot affirm thatshehasusedthepetitioner'smodelsor techniques
or identifyanyindepentent aboratorythathasdoneso.
an assistantprofessorat ', discussesthe
petitioner'swork in researchgroup. explainsthatrealisticgeometricmodels
areneededto understandhowcigarettesmokeaerosolsaccumulatein theupperrespiratorysystem.3
:ontmues:
[Thepetitioner]developeda mathematicalmodelanda setof computersourcecodeto
constructthe complex respiratorysystem. [The petitioner's] work has dramatically
improvedtheaccuracyof therespiratorysystemsimulationandprovidedacutting-edge
Page8
tool for lung diseaseresearch.His computersourcecodeis sofar themostefficient one
in thefield.
doesnot, however,provideexamplesof independentlung diseaseresearchersusingthe
petitioner'scomputersourcecode.
further statesthat the petitioner"developedanotherCFD model to answeran [sic] very
importantquestionwhy cigarettesmokeaerosolsdepositat a higherratein theupperrespiratorytract
than dilute stableparticleswith similar size." explainsthe hypothesisthat "at high
concentration ificant complex hydrodynamicinteractionscan occur betweenaerosolparticlesor
droplets" statesthat the functionof the petitioner's"new modelis to capturethe process
of theparticlefalling ontotheupperrespiratorytract." While assertsthatthepetitioner's
model successfullypredictedthe falling velocity of clusterparticlesand notesthat the petitioner
presentedtheseresultsat a conference,hedoesnot explainhowthis work is alreadybeingutilizedor
consideredfor applicationin thefield.
assertsthat he met the petitionerat an AmericanAssociationfor Aerosol Research
conferencein Florida. discussestheimportanceof thepetitioner'sareaof currentresearch,
whichis notcontested. thenassertsthattracingthesmokeparticlesmovement"is beyonda
physician'sreach." concludesthatthepetitioner'sresearch"helps physiciansandmedical
scientiststo understandthe detail of smoke particle[s] in the respiratorysystem and predict the
locationswherethetraumais mostlikely to happen."
More specifically, assertsthat the petitioner "developed a morphologically realistic
bifurcation(MRB) with exactmathematicaldescription." concludesthatthis modelis more
realisticthanothermodelsand"paveda fundamentalstepfor the accuratepredictionof the depositof
smoke particles in the respiratorysystem." doesnot provide examplesof independent
researchteamsapplyingor evenconsideringapplyingthepetitioner'smodel.
nextassertsthatthepetitioner"developedaCFDcloudmodelto clarifywhycigarettesmoke
aerosolsdepositat a higherratein theupperrespiratorytractthandilute stableparticlesof similar size."
While assertsthatthepetitioner'smodelis predictiveand"helpsdoctorsto understandthe
health risk of high-concentratedsmoke particles on the respiratorysystem," he does not provide
specificexamplesof doctorsusingthepetitioner'smodelsanddoesnotclaim to do sohimself.
Finally, explains that the petitioner's models are relevant to studying the efficacy of
inhalationtherapies.Specifically. assertsthatthepetitioner"developeda 3-D,unsteadylung
modelto capturethe flow-particlephysicsin the breathinglung." While speculatesthat
doctors"canrely" onthepetitioner'smodels,heprovidesnoexamplesof doctorswhohavedonesoor
areevenconsideringdoingso.
Page9
The Boardof ImmigrationAppeals(the Board)hasheld that testimonyshouldnot be disregarded
simply becauseit is "self-serving." See,e.g.,Matter ofS-A, 22 I&N Dec. 1328,1332(BIA 2000)
(citing cases).The Board also held, however· "We not only encourage,but require the introduction
of corroborative testimonial and documentary evidence, where available." Id If testimonial
evidencelacks specificity, detail, or credibility, there is a greaterneedfor the petitioner to submit
corroborativeevidence. Matter of Y-B-,21 I&N Dec. 1136(BIA 1998).
The opinions of expertsin the field arenot without weight andhavebeenconsideredabove. USCIS
may, m its discretion,useasadvisoryopinionsstatementssubmittedasexperttestimony. SeeMatter
of Caron International, 19 I&N Dec. 791, 795 (Comm'r. 1988). However,USCIS is ultimately
responsiblefor makingthe final determinationregardinganalien'seligibility for thebenefitsought.
Id The submissionof lettersfrom expertssupportingthe petition is not presumptiveevidenceof
eligibility; USCIS may, as we have doneabove,evaluatethe contentof thoselettersas to whether
they supportthe alien's eligibility. Seeid. at 795; seealso Matter of V-K-, 24 I&N Dec. 500, n.2
(BIA 2008) (noting that expert opinion testimony does not purport to be evidenceas to "fact").
USCIS may even give less weight to an opinion that is not corroborated,in accord with other
informationor is m anywayquestionable.Id at 795;seealsoMatterofSoffici, 22 I&N Dec. 158,
165 (Comm'r. 1998) (citing Matter of Treasure Crafi of California, 14 I&N Dec. 190 (Reg'l.
Comm'r. 1972)).
While thepetitionercontinuesto work with CFDmodeling,heis workingin a verydifferentareaof
this modelingthanhis pastwork. Specifically,heis no longermodelingheattransferin gasturbines
but aerosoldepositsin the human lung. While we do not questionthat some elementsof CFD
modelingis the samein both areas,thepetitionermustdemonstratethat his ability to succeedwith gas
turbinesis continuingin the areaof the humanlung. As of thedateof filing, thepetitionerhadyet to
publishanyarticlesconcerninghis aerosolresearchandhadmadeonly a singlepresentationof this
work. Thus,it appearsprematureto concludethat the petitionerwill benefitthe nationalinterestwith
this work.
As is clearfrom a plain readingof the statute,it wasnot the intentof Congressthat everyperson
qualifiedto engagein aprofessionin theUnitedStatesshouldbeexemptfromtherequirementof ajob
offer basedon national interest. Likewise, it doesnot appearto havebeenthe intent of Congressto
grantnationalinterestwaiverson thebasisof theoverall importanceof a givenprofession,ratherthan
on the merits of the individual alien. On the basisof the evidencesubmitted,the petitioner hasnot
establishedthat a waiver of the requirementof an approvedalien employmentcertification will be in
thenationalinterestof the UnitedStates.
The burdenof proof in theseproceedingsrestssolelywith the petitioner. Section291 of the Act,
8 U.S.C.§ 1361.Thepetitionerhasnotsustainedthatburden.
Page10
This denial is without prejudiceto the filing of a new petition by a United Statesemployer
accompaniedby an alienemploymentcertificationcertifiedby the Departmentof Labor,appropriate
supportingevidenceandfee.
ORDER: Theappealisdismissed.