dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Medicine

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: JUN. 06, 2023 In Re: 26953723 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, a physician, seeks employment-based second preference (EB-2) 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 classification . See Immigration and Nationality 
Act (the Act) section 203(b)(2), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(2). 
The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the petition, concluding that although she was eligible 
as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree, the record did not establish her eligibility 
or that she otherwise merited a national interest waiver as a matter of discretion. 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 Christo 's, Inc., 26 l&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. 
An advanced degree is any United States academic or professional degree or a foreign equivalent 
degree above that of a bachelor's degree. A United States bachelor's degree or foreign equivalent 
degree followed by five years of progressive experience in the specialty is the equivalent of a master's 
degree. [If a doctoral degree is customarily required for the specialty , the non-citizen must a United 
States doctorate or a foreign equivalent degree. (delete if doctorate not an issue)] 
8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2) . 
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 l&N Dec. 884, 889 (AAO 2016), provides the 
framework for adjudicating national interest waiver petitions. Dhanasar states that U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration Services (USCIS) may, as matter of discretion 1, grant a national interest waiver if 
the petitioner demonstrates that: 
• 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 Director determined that the Petitioner is eligible for the underlying EB-2 classification as a 
member of the professions holding an advanced degree. As the record includes a copy of her Title of 
Physician degree from thel !(Brazil) and an educational evaluation 
stating that this is equivalent to a Doctor of Medicine degree from an accredited institution in the U.S., 
we agree. 
A. The Proposed Endeavor 
The Petitioner is a physician who has experience as a general practitioner and a geriatrician. She 
initially indicated she would "continue using [her] expertise as a general practitioner and geriatrician 
to further advance the Americans' health and improve Americans' elderly lifetime," and further 
specified that her "focus will be to work as a geriatric doctor." She also supported her proposed 
endeavor by submitting a letter from the Director of theI I Medical Services I I clinic, 
stating that they "would like to engage in a professional relationship" with her as a geriatrician. 
In responding to the Director's request for evidence (RFE), she made the same statements, but also 
indicated that she would develop the business of a medical clinic that she would own and manage. 
She further added that her proposed endeavor would include "establishing connections with medically 
underserved communities and areas where the healthcare is not available." This was supported by a 
business plan for her proposed clinic, as well as a new letter froml Iwhich stated that in addition 
to her duties as a geriatrician, it planned for her to "give lectures around the country by creating 
teaching materials, preparing for tutorials/seminars and marking students' work, as well as direct 
teaching in underserved communities." 
In his decision, the Director determined that the Petitioner's new information about her proposed 
medical clinic and her role as owner and manager of that business constituted an impermissible 
material change and created doubts about the nature of her endeavor. A petitioner may not make 
material changes to a petition in an effort to make a deficient petition conform to USCIS requirements. 
See Matter ofIzummi, 22 I&N Dec. 169, 176 (Assoc. Comm'r 1998). On appeal, the Petitioner asserts 
that this new information and documentation was not a material change to her proposed endeavor, but 
additional details and clarification about her proposed endeavor. She argues that her intention was 
and remains to work as a physician, whether for an employer or at her own clinic. 
1 See also Poursina v. USCJS, 936 F.3d 868 (9th Cir. 2019) (finding USCIS' decision to grant or deny a national interest 
waiver to be discretionmy in nature). 
2 
The Petitioner's initial description of her proposed endeavor did not include plans to form and manage 
her own company, but only to be employed as a geriatric physician. This was supported by the letter 
froml lwhich expressed interest in employing her in such a role. We conclude that to the extent 
that her RFE response added the elements of entrepreneurialism and business management to her 
proposed endeavor, this was a change which was material to her petition for a national interest waiver, 
and was therefore not permitted. Accordingly, we will only consider her proposal to practice as a 
general practitioner and geriatrician when conducting our analysis under the Dhanasar framework. 
B. Substantial Merit and National Importance 
The first prong, substantial merit and national importance, focuses on the specific endeavor that the 
individual 
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. 
Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. 
The Director referenced his initial determination (from the RFE) that the Petitioner's proposed 
endeavor was of substantial merit, but concluded that because of her material change to the proposed 
endeavor, that determination was moot. Based upon the Petitioner's description of her endeavor and 
the evidence showing the importance of geriatric care in the United States, we conclude that her 
proposed work as a general practitioner and geriatrician is of substantial merit. 
Regarding the national importance of the proposed endeavor, the Director again referenced the 
material change made in the Petitioner's RFE response and concluded that this made the nature and 
national importance of the proposed endeavor "doubtful." On appeal, in addition to disputing that the 
new evidence and information amounted to a material change, the Petitioner notes the evidence she 
submitted regarding the growing need for elderly care in the United States. These materials included 
a White House fact sheet describing reforms to nursing home administration, and media reports about 
the practice of geriatrics and the aging population in particular states. She also refers to an expert 
opinion letter she submitted in support of her petition, which also cites the aging population in the 
United States and the lack of geriatricians sufficient to meet this demand as factors which support the 
national importance of the Petitioner's proposed endeavor. 
As stated by the Director, when conducting an analysis under the first prong of the Dhanasar 
framework, we focus on the specific endeavor that a petitioner proposes to undertake. Id. The 
evidence noted above describes the importance of the field of geriatrics, but does not show the national 
importance of the Petitioner's proposed work as a geriatrician. As with the petitioner's proposed 
teaching activities in Dhanasar, the record here does not indicate that the Petitioner's practice of 
geriatrics, whether in her clinic, atl Ior somewhere else in the United States, would impact the 
field of geriatrics more broadly. In addition, the two sentences in the secondl Iletter devoted to 
its plan for the Petitioner to "give lectures around the country" lack sufficient detail and supporting 
evidence to be considered here, and more importantly she makes no mention of lecturing or teaching 
as a part of her proposed endeavor in either of her statements. Similarly, the Petitioner's vague 
statements that she will "establish[ing] connections with medically underserved communities" are 
insufficiently specific to demonstrate the potential prospective impact of such activity. 
3 
For the reasons given above, we conclude that the Petitioner has not established the national 
importance of her proposed endeavor, and therefore does not meet the first prong of the Dhanasar 
analytical framework. 
B. Well Positioned to Advance the Proposed Endeavor 
The second prong shifts the focus from the proposed endeavor to the individual. To determine whether 
they are well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor, we consider factors including, but not 
limited to: their 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. Id. at 890. 
The Director's decision concerning the second prong focused mainly on the Petitioner's lack of 
experience as an entrepreneur to show that she is well positioned to advance her proposed clinic, but 
also noted that the evidence regarding her training and experience as a physician was insufficient to 
establish the same regarding her proposal to work as a geriatrician. On appeal, the Petitioner again 
asserts that the evidence of her education, training, and 12 years of experience as a physician meet the 
requirements of the second prong of the Dhanasar analysis. 
We acknowledge the Petitioner's diploma, training certificates, and letters from collrgues wlich 
show her education, skills, and knowledge as a physician, and the letters from and 
documentation regarding her qualification to work as a physician in the United States which 
demonstrate a plan for future activities. However, this evidence shows that she has only just begun 
the process for achieving licensure as a physician in the United States, and thus was not eligible to 
participate in, let alone advance, her proposed endeavor at the time she filed her petition. See 
8 C.F .R. § 103 .2(b )(1 ). As such, we conclude that the Petitioner has not established that she is well 
positioned to advance her proposed endeavor. 
C. Whether on Balance a Waiver is Beneficial 
The third prong requires a 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. However, as a 
petitioner must meet all three prongs of the framework to be eligible for a national interest waiver, we 
reserve our evaluation of the third prong of the Dhanasar framework. See INS v. Bagamasbad, 429 
U.S. 24, 25 (1976) (finding it unnecessary to analyze additional grounds when another independent 
issue is dispositive of the appeal); see also Matter of D-L-S-, 28 I&N Dec. 568, 576-77 n.10 (BIA 
2022) (declining to reach alternative issues on appeal where an applicant is otherwise ineligible). 
III. CONCLUSION 
The evidence establishes the Petitioner's eligibility for the EB-2 immigrant classification as a member 
of the professions holding an advanced degree. However, the record does not show that her proposed 
endeavor to practice as a physician in the areas of general practice and geriatrics is of national 
importance, or that she is well positioned to advance that endeavor. Further, the Petitioner's addition 
of entrepreneurial and business management elements to her proposed endeavor was an impermissible 
4 
material change to her petition, and as such could not be considered. She has therefore not established 
that she is eligible for, or otherwise merits, a national interest waiver. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
5