dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Medicine

MATTER OF T-H-C-
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: OCT. 22, 2018 
APPEAL OF NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
PETITION: FORM 1-140, IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER 
The Petitioner, a medical clinic, seeks second preference immigrant classification for the Beneficiary 
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 the 
beneficiary's 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 Director of the Nebraska Service Center denied the Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien 
Worker, and a subsequent motion, finding that the Petitioner 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 the Beneficiary is eligible for a national interest waiver under 
the Dhanasar framework. 
Upon de novo review, we will dismiss the appeal. 
I. LAW 
To establish eligibility for a national interest waiver, a petitioner must first demonstrate the 
beneficiary's 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. -
Matter ofT-H-C-
(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, 
USC IS 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 
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, 
1 In announcing this new framework, we vacated our prior precedent decision, Matter of New York State Department of 
Transportation, 22 l&N Dec. 215 (Act. Assoc. Comm 'r 1998) (NYSDO'J). 
2 
.
Matter ofT-H-C-
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 
Although not addressed in the Director's decision, the record demonstrates that the Beneficiary qualifies 
as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree.3 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. 
A. Substantial Merit and National Importance of the Proposed Endeavor4 
The Petitioner seeks to employ the Beneficiary as a research manager and coordinator.5 The 
Beneficiary's job description listed in part 5 of the Form 1-140 states she will "[m]aintain and 
process patient and research data, monitor study activities in compliance with protocol, [ and] hire 
and supervise research staff."6 In addition, the record includes letters from the Petitioner's two lead 
researchers indicating that they intend to collaborate on future research with the Beneficiary. 
In his initial letter, founder and president of the Petitioner, asserts that he is 
currently conducting a clinical outcome study of Multiple Sclerosis (MS) and that his research goal 
is "to find cures for Multiple Sclerosis and other neurological illnesses."7 With respect to the 
Beneficiary's proposed work, states: "[The Beneficiary] will create and coordinate 
appropriate system to process patients and research information linking them with the disease. She 
2 See Dhanasar, 26 l&N Dec. at 888-91, for elaboration on these three prongs. 
3 The record reflects that the Petitioner earned a master of business administration degree from in 
in May 2013. 
4 We note that the Director's decision did not identify or analyze the evidence provided for either this prong or the second 
~rong of the Dhanasar framework. 
As the Petitioner is applying for a waiver of the job offer requirement, it is not necessary for the Beneficiary to have a 
job offer from a specific employer. However, we consider information about her position with the Petitioner to illustrate 
the capacity in which she intends to work. 
6 The record includes earnings statements indicating that the Beneficiary recently started working for the Petitioner in April 
2017. According to the Beneficiary's Form ETA-750B, Statement of Qualifications of Alien, she was previously employed 
by the Petitioner as a clinical manager from June 2013 until June 2014. 
7 The record includes information from the Petitioner's website stating: '' worked as a Research Specialist at the 
, California where established a long-term collaboration with of 
to interpret myelin, multiple sclerosis, neurodegenerative and autoimmune disorders from the perspective of Tibetan 
Medicine. . . . has published numerous articles on Tibetan medicine. His research paper on Multiple Sclerosis 
was published in 2007." In addition, the Petitioner presents a research article coauthored by in 
Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences entitled ' 
3 
.
Matter ofT-H-C-
will set up and maintain coordination and information exchange with research facilities in U.S. and 
abroad." subsequent letter contends that the Beneficiary "is an important person for 
our research team on Multiple Sclerosis" and that "along with we have 
successfully presented our new way of treating Multiple Sclerosis at [] : . Our 
approach combines Tibetan Medicine with Functional Medicine and offers full understanding from 
the causes to the treatment methods." further explains that their "next step is to set up 
clinical trials for our new approach for treating Multiple Sclerosis." 
The Petitioner also presents a letter from reiterating that she, the Beneficiary, and 
are pursuing research aimed at improving treatment methods for MS. In addition, 
indicates that the Beneficiary's work as research coordinator involves guiding changes in 
patients' environmental factors, organizing patients' data, and recording the results from their 
research. She further states: "The purpose of our work is to achieve better understanding of how 
Tibetan methods work as treatment tools. We have shown that Tibetan herbs are superior to 
synthetic drugs in treating MS symptoms." Finally, contends that they intend "to further 
study these herbs" and "inform others about their advantages." We find that the Beneficiary's 
proposed clinical research aimed at investigating Tibetan herbs' advantages in alleviating the effects of 
MS and advancing treatment methods for MS has substantial merit. 
To satisfy the national importance requirement, the Petitioner must demonstrate the "potential 
prospective impact" of the Beneficiary's work. The record includes an article from Healthline.com 
discussing the prevalence of MS and the disease's risk factors, symptoms, and drug treatment 
options. For example, the article notes that MS "is the most widespread disabling neurological 
condition of young adults" and that "more than 400,000 people in the United States and about 2.5 
million people around the world have MS." In addition to the aforementioned article, the record 
includes letters of support from and discussing the potential benefits of the 
Beneficiary's proposed work. For instance, asserts that their proposed research 
presents "the opportunity to make great advances in medicine and improve life [for] hundreds of 
thousands [ of] people suffering from such a debilitating condition as Multiple Sclerosis." In 
addition, the Petitioner has submitted documentation indicating that the benefit of Beneficiary's 
proposed research has broader implications, as the results are disseminated to others in the field 
through professional journals and conferences. As the Petitioner has documented both the 
substantial merit and national importance of the Beneficiary's proposed research, we find that she 
meets the first prong of the Dhanasar framework. 8 
8 With respect to the Beneficiary's supervisory duties and patient processing work, while these endeavors have substantial 
merit, the record does not establish that her work in these areas would impact the MS research field or healthcare industry 
more broadly, as opposed to being limited to the Petitioner's patients and staff. Accordingly, without sufficient documentary 
evidence of their broader impact, the Beneficiary's supervisory and administrative duties and do not meet the "national 
importance" element of the first prong of the Dhanasar framework. Similarly, in Dhanasar, we detennined 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. 
4 
.
Matter ofT-H-C-
B. Well Positioned to Advance the Proposed Endeavor9 
The second prong shifts the focus from the proposed endeavor to the Beneficiary. The record 
reflects that, at the time of filing, she was concurrently pursuing a master's degree in oriental 
medicine at and working as an intern at that university's 
oriental medicine clinic.10 The Petitioner submitted documentation of the Beneficiary's academic 
credentials, professional certifications, medical training, and student awards for academic 
achievement and Russian language proficiency. The record also includes her curriculum vitae, 
recommendation letters from her educational institutions and employers, copies of and 
published and presented work, and online testimonials from two of 
patients.'' The Petitioner contends that the Beneficiary's educational credentials, medical training, 
work experience, and record of success in research render her well positioned to advance the 
proposed endeavor. 12 Upon review of this evidence, we find it does not establish that the 
Beneficiary is well positioned to advance the Petitioner's proposed research aimed at using Tibetan 
medicine to improve treatment of MS.13 
In letters supporting the petition, several individuals discuss the Beneficiary's prior research 
activities.14 For example, states that the Beneficiary has been part of his and 
MS research since 2013 and that they "owe much our success to [the Beneficiary's] 
abilities as a research manager. She helped us to translate medical documents between different 
languages and compiled patients' data that are crucial to this research." Furthermore, 
asserts that the Beneficiary "designed the system that allows us to store and classify the research 
materials and patient records." also indicates that after presenting their research 
concerning a "new way of treating Multiple Sclerosis at the in October 2017, he 
"received a call from reflecting that university's "interest in cooperating with our 
research." We note that this presentation post-dates the filing of the petition. Eligibility must be 
established at the time of filing. See 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(l), (12). Regardless, the record does not 
include evidence from to corroborate his claim. 
9 We note that the Director's decision did not identify or analyze the evidence provided for this prong. 
10 The Petitioner's initial submission included a letter from the director of oriental medicine clinic stating the 
Beneficiary's work there involved interacting with patients, and managing and organizing the clinic and its documents. 
According to the Beneficiary's Form ETA-750B, she "received patients according to clinical protocol, coordinated doctors 
and intern students to their assigned patients, [and] followed doctor's prescriptions and prepared herbs accordingly." 
11 These two patients' testimonials discuss how provided effective clinical treatment for their MS symptoms, 
but they do not mention the Beneficiary or her research projects. 
12 In addition to her master of business administration degree from the Beneficiary received a bachelor's 
degree of dentistry from (20 I 0). The Petitioner does not sufficiently explain how the 
Beneficiary's education and training in business administration and dentistry render her well positioned to advance MS 
research. 
13 Because the Beneficiary's proposed supervisory duties and patient processing work do not meet the first prong of the 
Dhanasar framework, our analysis under this prong will focus on whether she is well positioned to advance her proposed 
research. 
14 While not all of the reference letters are mentioned in our analysis, all of them were thoroughly reviewed and considered. 
5 
.
Matter ofT-H-C-
In addition, indicates that the Beneficiary "has the competency and years of handling our 
patients that have given us reviews" and that she "is the only other person who is familiar with this 
project" who "has sufficient skills and knowledge to be the research coordinator." Finally, 
director of the states that the 
Beneficiary was a member of that organization's clinical research team and that she "helped to 
complete the following project: 'Public Health-Minor's Oral Health,"' but does not discuss the 
significance of her work. 
The record demonstrates that the Beneficiary has been involved in research during her career and has 
assisted and with their conference presentations. While we recognize that 
research must add information to the pool of knowledge in some way in order to be accepted for 
publication, presentation, funding, or academic credit, not every individual participating in a 
research project will be found to be well positioned to advance his or her proposed research. Rather, 
we examine the factors set forth in Dhanasar to determine whether, for instance, the individual's 
progress towards achieving the goals of the proposed research, record of success in similar efforts, or 
generation of interest among relevant parties supports such a finding. Id. at 890. Here, the 
Petitioner has not shown that the Beneficiary's research has been frequently cited by independent 
researchers or otherwise served as an impetus for progress in the field, that it has affected treatment 
methods outside of the institutions where she has worked, or that it has generated substantial positive 
discourse in the broader medical community. Nor does the evidence otherwise demonstrate that her 
work constitutes a record of success or progress in her area of research. 
The evidence offered in the present matter is insufficient to show that the Beneficiary's medical 
research constitutes a record of success or progress in her field, or has garnered degree of interest in 
her work from relevant parties, that would rise to the level of rendering her well positioned to 
advance her proposed endeavor aimed at improving Tibetan medicine treatment methods for MS 
patients. As the record is insufficient to demonstrate that the Beneficiary is well positioned to 
advance her proposed endeavor, she has not established that she satisfies the second prong of the 
Dhanasar framework. 
C. Balancing Factors to Determine Waiver's Benefit to the United States 
As explained above, 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. Here, the Petitioner claims that the Beneficiary is eligible for a waiver due to her 
fluency in multiple languages, capability in translating Mongolian manuscripts, education, and the 
impracticality of labor certification, and because of the urgency of developing an effective treatment 
for those suffering from MS. However, as the Petitioner has not established that the Beneficiary is 
well positioned to advance her proposed endeavor as required by the second prong, she is not 
eligible for a national interest waiver and further discussion of the balancing factors under the third 
prong would serve no meaningful purpose. 
6 
Matter ofT-H-C-
III. CONCLUSION 
As the Petitioner has not met the requisite three prongs set forth in the Dhanasar analytical framework, 
we find that it has not established the Beneficiary is eligible for or otherwise merits a national 
interest waiver as a matter of discretion. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
Cite as Matter ofT-H-C-, ID# 1668377 (AAO Oct. 22, 2018) 
'7