dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Mixed Martial Arts

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
NOV. 07, 2023 In Re: 28450916 
Appeal of Nebraska Service Center Decision 
Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, a mixed martial arts fighter, seeks second preference immigrant classification as an 
individual of exceptional ability, 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 had 
not established eligibility as an individual of exceptional ability and that a waiver of the required job 
offer, and thus of the labor certification, would be in the national interest. The matter is now before 
us on appeal. 
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 I&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. 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2) defines exceptional ability as "a degree of expertise 
significantly above that ordinarily encountered in the sciences, arts, or business ." To demonstrate 
exceptional ability, a petitioner must submit at least three of the types of evidence listed at 8 C.F.R. § 
204.5(k)(3)(ii)(A)-(F) : 
(A) An official academic record showing that the [individual] has a degree, diploma, 
certificate, or similar award from a college, university, school, or other institution of 
learning relating to the area of exceptional ability; 
(B) Evidence in the form of letter(s) from current or former employer( s) showing that 
the [individual] has at least ten years of full-time experience in the occupation for which 
he or she is being sought; 
(C) A license to practice the profession or certification for a particular profession or 
occupation; 
(D) Evidence that the [individual] has commanded a salary, or other remuneration for 
services, which demonstrates exceptional ability; 
(E) Evidence of membership in professional associations; or 
(F) Evidence of recognition for achievements and significant contributions to the 
industry or field by peers, governmental entities, or professional or business 
organizations. 
But meeting at least three criteria does not, in and of itself: establish eligibility for this classification. 
We will then conduct a final merits determination to decide whether the evidence in its totality shows 
that a petitioner is recognized as having a degree of expertise significantly above that ordinarily 
encountered in the field. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(i)(3)(i); see also USCIS 6 Policy Manual F.2, 
https ://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual/volume-6-part- f-chapter-2. 
If a petitioner demonstrates qualification for the underlying EB-2 visa classification, they must then 
demonstrate 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," we set forth a framework for adjudicating national interest waiver petitions 
in the precedent decision Matter ofDhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. 884,889 (AAO 2016). Dhanasar provides 
that U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) may, as matter of discretion 1, grant a national 
interest waiver if the petitioner shows: 
• 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 Petitioner checked box 1.h in Part 2 of the Form 1-140, Immigrant Petitioner for Alien Worker, to 
indicate that he is applying of a national interest waiver. However, instead of providing evidence that 
he meets the underlying EB-2 visa classification under Section 203(b )(2)(B)(i) and satisfies the 
Dhanasar's three-pronged analytical framework, the Petitioner initially claimed that he meets the 
eligibility as an alien of extraordinary ability under Section 203(b )(1 )(A) and presented evidence that 
he satisfies three out of the ten criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 204.S(h). The Petitioner also did not state his 
1 See also Poursina v. USC1S, 936 F.3d 868 (9th Cir. 2019) (finding USCIS' decision to grant or deny a national interest 
waiver to be discretionary in nature). 
2 
proposed employment in Part 6 of the Form 1-140 and did not identify his proposed endeavor with his 
initial filing. 
The Director then issued a request for evidence (RFE) on August 17, 2022. The Director stated that 
the Petitioner did not demonstrate that he is a member of the professions holding advanced degree but 
that he met three of the criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(ii) as an individual of exceptional ability. 
The Director also indicated that meeting the minimum three criteria alone does not establish eligibility 
as an individual of exceptional ability for the EB-2 classification and that a final merits determination 
based on the totality of evidence is required to show that the Petitioner possessed a degree of expertise 
significantly above that ordinarily encountered in the sciences, arts, or business. In addition, the 
Director requested that the Petitioner present evidence that he meets the three prongs of Dhanasar. 
In response to the RFE, the Petitioner updated his claims according to the Dhanasar' s analytical 
framework and submitted a personal statement in which he described his background and experience 
as a mixed martial arts (MMA) fighter and identified his proposed endeavor as "promoting MMA and 
developing fitness and healthy lifestyles in the U.S., by applying my knowledge and expertise in this 
field." The Petitioner also submitted a business plan and an expert opinion letter. 
A. Qualification for EB-2 Classification 
The Director concluded that the Petitioner satisfied three criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(ii)(A), (E), 
and (F) to demonstrate eligibility for an individual of exceptional ability but did not conduct a final 
merits determination as to whether the Petitioner possessed a degree of expertise significantly above 
that ordinarily encountered in the sciences, arts, or business, as required. 
We disagree with the Director that his diploma of a specialist as an attorney issued on July 10, 2014, 
froml !University in Russia, meets the criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(ii)(A). This 
criterion requires an official academic record showing that the alien has a degree, diploma, certificate, 
or similar award from a college, university, school, or other institution oflearning relating to the area 
of exceptional ability. The record shows that the Petitioner studied law in obtaining his diploma, such 
as criminal law, labor law, administrative law, financial law, etc. The Petitioner does not provide any 
explanation or documentation showing that his studies somehow relate to the area of his exceptional 
ability, i.e., martial arts fighting and promoting healthy lifestyle. Therefore, we find that the 
Petitioner's diploma of a specialist as an attorney does not meet this criterion and withdraw this portion 
of the Director's decision. 
As we determine that the Petitioner only meets two of the six criteria, we need not make the final 
merits determination and conclude that the Petitioner is not eligible for the requested classification. 
Furthermore, the Petitioner does not claim on appeal that he meets the EB-2 classification as a member 
of the professions holding an advanced degree, and therefore, this issue is deemed waived. See, e.g., 
Matter of O-R-E-, 28 I&N Dec. 330,336 n.5 (BIA 2021) (citing Matter ofR-A-M-, 25 I&N Dec. 657, 
658 n.2 (BIA 2012)). 
3 
B. National Interest Waiver 
Because the Petitioner has not established his qualification as an individual of exceptional ability, he 
is not eligible for a national interest waiver of the classification's job offer requirement. However, we 
will provide an analysis of his claims under the first prong of the Dhanasar framework. Here, the 
Director found substantial merit in his endeavor but did not find national importance. 
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. Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. 
Although the Petitioner claimed that his endeavor is to promote healthy lifestyle in the United States, 
he does not provide a detailed and specific description of the endeavor he proposes to undertake. 
Instead, the Petitioner's personal statement generally discusses how the mixed martial arts industry 
is rising in popularity and increasing in its market size. The Petitioner also asserted that sports and 
fitness play a significant role in preventing diseases related to obesity and his endeavor relates to the 
government's priority on benefits of physical activity and healthy eating according to the Presidents' 
Council on Sports, Fitness & Nutrition (PCSFN). With this information, the Petitioner demonstrated 
his endeavor's substantial merit but not its national importance. Merely working in an important 
field is insufficient to establish the national importance of the proposed endeavor. In Dhanasar, we 
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 implications 
within a particular field." Id. 
The Petitioner also claims that he has expertise and experience as a marital arts fighter and refers to 
many of his prizes, media recognition, awards, and recommendations. But the Petitioner's 
qualifications 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 the Petitioner proposes to undertake has national importance under Dhanasar's first prong. 
In Dhanasar, we noted that "[a]n undertaking may have national importance for example, because it 
has national or even global implications within a particular field, such as those resulting from certain 
improved manufacturing processes or medical advances." Id. However, the Petitioner has not 
explained or provided evidence to support how his endeavor will revise and improve the quality of 
mixed martial arts so substantial as to affect the nation as a whole, not just his own clients. The 
Petitioner submitted an expert opinion letter from I I a professor in the sport 
management program within the Department of Kinesiology at I I University. Instead of 
discussing the details of the Petitioner's specific endeavor or unique methodologies as a mixed martial 
arts fighter and their impact to the nation,~---~-~reiterates the generalized claims previously 
made by the Petitioner in his own statement, discussing the growth of the mixed martial arts industry 
and profession, along with the claims that the Petitioner's endeavor impacts the U.S. government's 
national initiatives on physical activity. 
4 
Here, the expert opinion letter here is of little probative value as it does not meaningfully address the 
details of the proposed endeavor as to why it would have national importance. As a matter of 
discretion, we may use opinion statements submitted by the Petitioner as advisory, but the submission 
of expert opinion letters is not presumptive evidence of eligibility. Matter ofCaron Int 'l, Inc., 19 I&N 
Dec. 791, 795 (Comm'r 1988). 
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." Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 890. The Petitioner 
asserted in his business plan that he will "open a gym in the future" and that his business will "drive 
economic stability and growth by providing valuable fitness and boxing services that serve to directly 
contribute to the improved health of the wider community," "provide jobs, consequently strengthening 
the economic health of the local area," and create "high levels of revenue" and "higher taxes" which 
will "then be used to maintain the infrastructure of a city, state, or entire country." 
However, the Petitioner has not submitted independent and corroborating evidence that supports his 
assertions. The business plan does not contain any details about building a gym in the United States 
or how his business would go beyond the customers and fighters that he would train to provide a broad 
impact in the field. Instead, the business plan, similar to the personal statement and the expert opinion, 
discusses the general problem of child obesity and the value of the mixed martial arts. The Petitioner 
did not offer evidence in the form of projected staffing levels or hiring plans to demonstrate that his 
proposed gym would employ a significant population of workers in an economically depressed area 
or that his endeavor would offer a U.S. region or its population a substantial economic benefit through 
employment levels or business activity. It is insufficient to claim an endeavor has national importance 
or will create a broad impact without providing evidence to corroborate such claims. The Petitioner 
must support his assertions with relevant, probative, and credible evidence. See Matter ofChawathe, 
25 I&N Dec. at 376. 
On appeal, the Petitioner does not make any new assertions showing national importance of his 
proposed endeavor other than what was already submitted to the Director as a part of the RFE response. 
The Petitioner states on appeal that "USCIS erred in not finding that the evidence in the record 
established that the proposed endeavor's of national importance" but the record does not sufficiently 
support his claims. Much like the petitioner's proposed endeavor of teaching in the Dhanasar 
decision, the record does not indicate that the Petitioner's activities would impact the field of martial 
arts on a broader level, beyond the impact it would have on the Petitioner's individual trainees and 
clients. Therefore, we conclude that the Petitioner has not established that any aspect of his proposed 
endeavor would be of national importance, and thus he has not demonstrated his eligibility under the 
first prong of the Dhanasar framework. Accordingly, he has not established that he is eligible for, or 
otherwise merits, a waiver of the EB-2 classification's job offer requirement, and thus the requirement 
of a labor certification. 
III. CONCLUSION 
The Petitioner has not established that he qualifies as an individual of exceptional ability, or that he is 
otherwise eligible for the underlying EB-2 immigrant visa classification. In addition, he has not shown 
that that he is eligible for, or otherwise merits, a national interest waiver of that classification's 
5 
requirement of a job offer. 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