dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Non-Profit Advocacy

idedifying data deleted to 
prevent clearly unwarranted 
invasion of personal privacy 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services 
OJce of Administrative Appeals MS 2090 
Washington. DC 20529-2090 
U. S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Office: NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER Date: 
LIN 07 104 52.598 
 MAR 2 '7 2009 
PETITION: 
 Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker as a Member of the Professions Holding an Advanced 
Degree or an Alien of Exceptional Ability Pursuant to Section 203(b)(2) of the Immigration 
and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. tj 1153(b)(2) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
INSTRUCTIONS: 
This is the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office in your case. All documents have been returned to 
the office that originally decided your case. Any further inquiry must be made to that office. 
If you believe the law was inappropriately applied or you have additional information that you wish to have 
considered, you may file a motion to reconsider or a motion to reopen. Please refer to 8 C.F.R. 8 103.5 for 
the specific requirements. All motions must be submitted to the office that originally decided your case by 
filing a Form I-290B, Notice of Appeal or Motion, with a fee of $585. Any motion must be filed within 30 
days of the decision that the motion seeks to reconsider or reopen, as required by 8 C.F.R. tj 103,5(a)(l)(i). 
fl 
Acting Chief, Administrative Appeals Office 
DISCUSSION: The Director, Nebraska Service Center, denied the employment-based immigrant visa 
petition. The matter is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The AAO will 
dismiss the appeal. 
The petitioner seeks classification pursuant to section 203(b)(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act 
(the Act), 8 U.S.C. 3 1153(b)(2), as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree. The 
petitioner is the founding president and director of for Human Rights and Social Justice, a 
non-profit advocacy organization. She also seeks to act as a consultant for other organizations. The 
petitioner asserts that an exemption from the requirement of a job offer, and thus of a labor certification, 
is in the national interest of the United States. The director found that the petitioner qualifies for 
classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree, but that the petitioner has not 
established that an exemption from the requirement of a job offer would be in the national interest of the 
United States. 
Section 203(b) of the Act states in pertinent part that: 
(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 eeonomy, 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) . . . the 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. 
The director did not dispute that the petitioner qualifies as a member of the professions holding an 
advanced degree. The sole issue in contention is whether the petitioner has established that a waiver of 
the job offer requirement, and thus a labor certification, is in the national interest. 
Neither the statute nor the pertinent regulations define the term "national interest." Additionally, 
Congress did not provide a specific definition of "in the national interest." The Committee on the 
Judiciary merely noted in its report to the Senate that the committee had "focused on national interest by 
increasing the number and proportion of visas for immigrants who would benefit the United States 
economically and otherwise. . . ." S. Rep. No. 55, lOlst Cong., 1st Sess., 11 (1989). 
Page 3 
Supplementary information to regulations implementing the Immigration Act of 1990 (IMMACT), 
published at 56 Fed. Reg. 60897, 60900 (November 29, 1991), states: 
The Service [now U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services] believes it appropriate to 
leave the application of this test as flexible as possible, although clearly an alien seeking 
to meet the [national interest] standard must make a showing significantly above that 
necessary to prove the "prospective national benefit" [required of aliens seeking to 
qualify as "exceptional."] The burden will rest with the alien to establish that exemption 
from, or waiver of, the job offer will be in the national interest. Each case is to be 
judged on its own merits. 
Matter of New York State Dept. of Transportation, 22 I&N Dec. 21 5 (Comm. 1998), has set forth 
several factors which must be considered when evaluating a request for a national interest waiver. First, 
it must be shown that the alien seeks employment in an area of substantial intrinsic merit. Next, it must 
be shown that the proposed benefit will be national in scope. Finally, the petitioner seeking the waiver 
must establish that the alien will serve the national interest to a substantially greater degree than would 
an available U.S. worker having the same minimum qualifications. 
It must be noted that, while the national interest waiver hnges on prospective national benefit, it clearly 
must be established that the alien's past record justifies projections of future benefit to the national 
interest. The petitioner's subjective assurance that the alien will, in the future, serve the national interest 
cannot suffice to establish prospective national benefit. The inclusion of the term "prospective" is used 
here to require future contributions by the alien, rather than to facilitate the entry of an alien whose 
benefit to the national interest would be entirely speculative. 
The petitioner filed the petition on February 22, 2007. On Form ETA-750B, Statement of 
Qualifications of Alien, the petitioner detailed her employment history with various non-profit 
organizations. She indicated that she had worked as a program associate and program assistant at New 
Voices National Fellowshp Program from October 2000 to August 2002; as a campaign coordinator for 
Andolan fi-om September 2004 to March 2005; and as an advance peer educator for the Asian Pacific 
Islander Coalition on HIVIAIDS (APICHA) from January 2005 to June 2005. The petitioner did not 
specify what compensation, if any, she received from the above organizations. The etitioner asserted 
that, starting in July 2005, she began working "full time" as president of d "performing the 
work pro-bono" as an H-4 nonimmigrant, deriving status (but not employment authorization) from her 
spouse's H- 1 B nonimrnigrant status. 
In a statement accompanying the initial filing of the petition in February 2007, the petitioner stated: 
I . . . [seek] to work in the American nonprofit sector as a nonprofit organizations 
capacity building consultant. Specifically this will involve, among others, helping 
nonprofit organizations in the United States become more effective in their advocacy, 
organizing and fundraising efforts, so that such organizations may achieve their mission 
more effectively. In addition I will be working as an organizer and public policy 
Page 4 
advocate by founding nonprofit organizations (such as 
 a not-for-profit tax- 
exempt organization that I founded) and coordinating events designed to advocate and 
raise awareness of issues relating to social justice, equality and democracy in the US. . . . 
My work in the nonprojt sector, speclJically pertaining to issues related to social 
justice, equality, democracy and others, will contribute to raising social consciousness 
on critical issues underlying democracy in the United States, will strengthen the ability 
of the American people (particularly new Americans) to self determine their actions by 
empowering them and will also help spread democratic values, commensurate with 
American values abroad, thereby enhancing the reputation of the United States abroad. 
Further, it is not practical for me to engage in the kind of work I propose with a specialty 
occupation visa (Hlb) or an employer petitioned immigrant visa. First, these visas will 
tie me to a specific employer, whereas the employment areas I propose are 
entrepreneurial by nature and require flexibility. Second, as I will be self-employed, I 
am petitioning on my own behalf. Finally, as I currently hold . . . H4 status, I have been 
doing all the work . . . without compensation. . . . [Tlhe ability to reasonably compensate 
myself for the efforts I put in this work is crucial for my long term involvement in ths 
area. . . . 
Adhikaar was founded under my leadership in mid-2005, in order to address the needs 
of a rapidly growing Nepali immigrant community in the United States. . . . 
Underrepresented but important 
 of . . . Nepali origin have 
benefited fiom the following activities of 
Providing direct assistance to hundreds of Nepalis living in the New York 
metro region through interpretation services, employment related counseling, 
free health screenings and other services 
Facilitating and co-hosting of the first ever health fair for Nepali community in 
New York, and also a health fair for South Asians 
Organizing and hosting regular skills workshops, panel discussions and 
information circles 
Launching of the Jankari Research Project to provide . . . comprehensive data 
about the Nepali communities living in the United states to assess their needs 
as well as to disseminate information about their contribution to the American 
economy and culture 
Despite its limited size and resources, the success that is achieving illustrates 
the exemplary utilization of capacity building techniques and that smaller organization[s] 
can be effective agents of social change and positive consequences with innovative 
capacity building strategies. 
Page 5 
The AAO acknowledges that there are certain occupations wherein individuals are essentially self- 
employed, and thus would have no U.S. employer to apply for a labor certification. While this fact will 
be given due consideration in appropriate cases, the inapplicability or unavailability of a labor 
certification cannot be viewed as sufficient cause for a national interest waiver; the petitioner still must 
demonstrate that the self-employed alien will serve the national interest to a substantially greater degree 
than do others in the same field. Matter of New York State Dept. of Transportation at 218, n.5. The 
petitioner must show not only that she is a community activist who works with non-profit organizations, 
but also that her work in this area stands out to an extent that would justify a waiver of the statutory job 
offer requirement that would otherwise apply. 
The petitioner submitted documentation showing that 
 has participated in health fairs, training 
workshops, and other community activities in the New York metropolitan area. This information 
confirms the petitioner's involvement in such activities, but it offers no basis for comparison between 
the petitioner and others who are likewise active in community affairs. 
The petitioner documented her receipt of various grants and awards, one of the largest of which was a 
$20,000 Joseph F. Wall Sesquicentennial Service Award in 2006. Only alumni of Grinnell College 
qualify for the award;indicated that the petitioner was one of two winners 
selected "from among nine very strong alumni applicants." The materials in the record indicate that the 
award was not presented in recognition of the petitioner's achievements in community service. Rather, 
the petitioner submitted a proposal for future work, to be funded by the award. The record does not 
show the results of the petitioner's expenditure of the award money. 
The record shows that - has received funds from numerous sources, but the petitioner has not 
shown that this is unusual for non-profit activist groups. A document from the Sparkplug Foundation, 
for instance, indicated that the foundation gave out over $120,000 in "2006 Spring Grants." 
received $5,000 of that total, whlle many other organizations received as much or more. 
The petitioner andlor Adhikaar received coverage on various electronic and print publications, including 
New York Nepali Times and The desiconnect, described by one of its publishers as "the first and only 
weekly magazine dedicated to young, South Asian professionals." The petitioner did not establish the 
circulation or significance of these publications. 
The petitioner submitted copies of letters from various individuals describing how the petitioner and 
have helped them. 
 manager of Women in sustainable ~eveli~ment, stated 
that the petitioner "has been helping me with language translation and providing me other advice for 
advancing my legal case." 
of Lexington, Kentucky, thanked 
 for sending "a very strong letter7' in 
efforts of a woman (whose name has been blacked out of the copy of the 
letter) to get her job back, after being terminated in what "[slhe believed . . . was an act of 
discrimination." 
In a letter addressed to the petitioner, 
 of Jackson Heights, New York, stated: 
1 am thrilled to learn that has successfillly opened a new office space in 
Jackson Heights, Queens. This is an outstanding achievement for such a young 
organization. is already making strides to meet the unrnet needs of the greater 
New York Nepali community. . . . 
I also write to congratulate you personally, as a board member and leader of - 
for your dedication, vision, and skill in bringing the organization to the point where it is 
now. Your role . . . has been vital in transforming -om an idea into a real 
institution with tax-exempt status. More recently, your execution of first 
annual fundraiser in September 2006 was integral to promoting growth and 
the acquisition of the Jackson Heights office space. Based on my professional 
experience in development and communications for non-profit organizations, I was 
impressed at the success of this event - both its robust attendance and the amount it 
raised. . . . Not only did the event recoup its costs, it also secured close to $5,000 in 
funds for the organization, raised in-lund contributions, renewed the conviction and 
focus of staff and volunteers, and raised awareness about 
 among members of 
the public and key partners in the community. 
ms letter is clearly very complimentary toward the petitioner, but it offers few means of 
objectively compa to other organizations, or the petitioner to other non-profit 
entrepreneurs. Ms. that the petitioner's accomplishments were impressive, but it is 
not clear how much weight this carries, given that she also called renting office space "an outstanding 
achievement." Ms. referred to her own "professional experience in development and 
communications for non-profit organizations," but offered no details. As regards her own employment, 
Ms. stated that she is "clerking for a federal district judge this year, and will remain in the 
city while clerking for a federal appellate judge next year." 
Other letters are more specifically directed toward the petitioner's waiver request. Many of these letters 
were from individuals at educational institutions where the petitioner had studied. For example, = 
-, Dean of the Woodrow Wilson School (WWS) of Public and International Affairs at 
Princeton University, stated: 
[The petitioner] makes an important value proposition that she seeks to enhance 
multiethnic and multicultural understanding and cooperation between the United States 
and South Asia, including the South Asian immigrants already present in the United 
States. Given her South Asian background and her work experience in South Asia, and 
the increasing U.S. economic and national security interest in the region, such work 
promises to yield major benefits not only in enhancing the cohesiveness of American 
society, but also in serving the higher U.S. goals in that region. 
Page 7 
[The petitioner] possesses the requisite intellectual rigor and training to tackle these 
issues successfully due to her academic training at institutions such as Grinnell College 
and the Woodrow Wilson School. While a student at the Woodrow Wilson School, she 
was active in various groups and helped organize many events, including the annual 
Princeton Colloquium on Public and International Affairs. Given her demonstrated 
commitment and passion to human rights and democracy and her deep belief in the non- 
profit sector's capacity to enhance all our lives, I am confident that she will be 
successful in her ventures and that her work will make contributions to the 
aforementioned areas to the benefit of the United States. 
did not discuss the petitioner's impact on the non-profit sector; instead, she stated that 
the petitioner's background has equipped her well for a career in that sector. 
of Grinnell Colle e, where the petitioner earned her bachelor's degree, 
&stated: 
was an early supporter of 
 Prof. 
[The petitioner's] work in nonprofit sector capacity building drives at the very core of 
nonprofit organizational operations, such as operational efficiency in programming, 
better event management, effective fund raising and scaling up human resources 
recruitment, training and retention. . . . 
[The petitioner] is well prepared to handle the intellectual and analytical rigor that is 
demanded of a nonprofit consultant, advocate and organizer. Further, the nonprofit 
sector succeeds because of people like who possess a depth of passion and 
commitment to the causes that the sector serves. 
Director of New Voices National Fellowship Program of the Academy for Educational 
Development (AED), described New Voices as "a national fellowship grant program focused on 
developing a new generation of leaders and small nonprofits dedicated to social justice." Regarding the 
petitioner's work there, stated: 
While at New Voices (October 2000 to August 2002), [the petitioner] was our in-house 
expert and resource person on women's rights and international economic policy. She 
was responsible for marketing our program to small non-profits and emerging leaders, 
managing the grant selection process, building our presence on the worldwide web, 
administering ow financial aid program, and identifying resources and strategies helpful 
to addressing intersections between leadership, gender, and economics. She also helped 
organize our biannual leadership development conferences. . . . 
In addition to her program responsibilities, [the petitioner] also played an important role 
in our fundraising efforts, which secured more than $2 million dollars [sic] each year for 
our program. She also received [the] 2001 Innovation Award, given to a few individuals 
Page 8 
for outstanding performance each year, for her role in securing the 2-year extension of 
New Voices program. 
[The petitioner] joined us towards the beginning of the program, and helped us develop 
systems to increase efficiency and improve communication with our fellows. She 
happily went above and beyond her job description to assist in all aspects of the 
program. Outside the program, she was also active in promoting the voice of the 
administrative support staff, and was elected as their representative to advance their 
cause within AED. She organized professional development activities, and also met 
with the President of AED to advocate for more recognition and additional resources to 
support administrative staff. . . . 
With the additional experience that she has acquired through her involvement in many 
other nonprofit organizations . . . , [the petitioner] is well positioned to make significant 
contributions to the nonprofit sector. 
Managing Director of the Panta Rhea Foundation, Sausalito, California, stated: 
Many years ago I did some media related work in Nepal where I forged very close 
relationships and fnendshps with 
 a colleague of [the petitioner]. . . . 
[The petitioner] has done commendable work in the social justice arena. . . . Her 
leadership in establishing and running . proves her passion for being a part 
of the solution as well as the abilitv to do so. 
= Senior Research Scholar and Research Director at Columbia University Teachers College, 
President of the America-Nepal Friendship Society and General Secretary of the Nepalese American 
Council, stated: 
I met [the petitioner] in February 2005, when we both worked together to organize the 
first public discussion about the deteriorating democracy and human rights situation in 
Nepal immediately after the king seized power. . . . 
[The petitioner] has carved out a leadership position for herself. Now, many men and 
women from the community seek her out for support and advice. Additionally, with her 
work in other non-profit organizations and coalitions, she is also establishing herself as a 
leader beyond the Nepali community. . . . 
[The petitioner] is building leadership capacity of newcomer communities and also her 
own leadership potential. . . . 
I recently spoke at the first award ceremony and fundraiser organized by The 
attendees were an impressive assemblage of accomplished Nepali-Americans, South 
Asians, and others - a vote of confidence to this newborn organization! Many of the 
attendees left with multi-year pledges to help-nancially and to provide pro- 
bono services. This event gives an illustration of [the petitioner's] ability to inspire 
people to be socially responsive and commit their resources and efforts towards making 
things better. 
On April 3, 2008, the director issued a request for evidence (WE), instructing the petitioner to submit 
documentary evidence to support several of the claims put forth in the initial submission. The director 
also instructed the petitioner to establish her influence on her field. In response, counsel asserted that 
the petitioner's founding of addressed a previously unmet need: 
The fact that no US worker had previously organized efforts and worked to address the 
problems facing the Nepali speaking community in the US prior to [the petitioner] 
demonstrates that possession of similar minimum qualification is not sufficient to 
perform work of this nature and certainly not in the caliber that [the petitioner] has 
performed. 
Counsel appears to assert that, because the petitioner was the first to establish a Nepalese advocacy 
organization in the United States, she must have been the first person who was capable of doing so. 
This presumption is flawed and baseless. The record does not definitively establish that the petitioner 
was, indeed, the first person to establish such an organization, and even if she was, this does not imply 
that only the petitioner has been abIe to do so. It may well be the case that other individuals hlly 
trained in the operation of non-profit organizations simply chose to turn their attention to issues other 
than advocating for Nepalese interests. There are countless non-profit organizations in the United 
States, and there is no evidence that operating such an organization on behalf of Nepalese immigrants is 
fundamentally any more difficult or challenging than operating an organization with a different focus. 
Counsel stated: "has created paid work opportunities for US workers 
 The organization 
employs up to 5 people, including interns, in paid capacity." Counsel added: ' has offered 
learning opportunities for many other people." Counsel failed to explain how these assertions are 
unusual or set the petitioner apart from the leaders of other non-profit organizations. Furthermore, the 
record lacks documentary support for these assertions. 
The petitioner submitted documentation showing that she received the Helen LaKelly Hunt 
Neighborhood Leadership Award, a local award presented by the New York Women's Foundation, 
in September 2007. The award received some local media attention at the time. The record does not 
establish the significance of this award. Under 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(k)(ii)(F), evidence of recognition 
for achievements and significant contributions to the industry or field by peers, governmental 
entities, or professional or business organizations can form part - but not all - of a claim of 
exceptional ability. Exceptional ability, in turn, is not automatically grounds for a waiver; by statute, 
aliens of exceptional ability are typically subject to the job offer requirement. 
Page 10 
Even if we assume, for the sake of argument, that recipients of this award qualify for the waiver, the 
beneficiary of an immigrant visa petition must be eligible at the time of filing; subsequent 
developments cannot establish eligibility. See Matter of Katigbak, 14 I&N Dec. 45, 49 (Regl. 
Commr. 1971). The petitioner received this award about seven months after she filed the petition in 
February 2007. Counsel stated: "although these awards and recognition were conferred on dates 
following the submission of the petition, the recognition was primarily for work performed [prior to] 
the submission date of the petition." The record contains no statement from any official of the entity 
that presented the award, or any alternative evidence to support counsel's claim. 
Beyond the recent coverage of 
 the petitioner submitted copies of older news articles, 
mostly fiom October 2004, describing how certain foreign diplomats stationed in the United States 
were exploiting immigrant workers in their homes. The articles discuss the involvement of Andolan 
in publicizing this issue. The petitioner worked at Andolan at the time, but the articles do not 
mention her. While worker exploitation is an important issue, we cannot find that everyone who 
worked for Andolan in late 2004 qualifies for a waiver based on that work, and the record does not 
indicate that the petitioner played a particularly significant role when the issue surfaced. 
New letters accompanied the petitioner's response to the RFE. 
 a member of 
s Board of Directors, stated: 
[I]n less than three years, has grown many folds and has served thousands 
of individuals fiom Nepal, Bhutan, ~ibet, India, and other South Asian countries. . . . 
An organization that started with $500 in 2005, now has a budget of nearly a 
quarter million dollars, and has provided paid work and internship opportunities, as 
well as training through volunteer opportunities. . . . 
It would not be an exaggeration to say that [the petitioner] has single-handedly put the 
issues of Nepali-speaking communities on the map. For the first time, voices of Nepalis 
in the U.S. have been covered by mainstream media [on] a regular basis. - 
work was featured in the front page of The New York Times City Section, in addition 
to a number of city-wide newspapers, online publications, and local news media. . . . 
Adhikaar has become known as a bridge between the Nepali community and other 
organizations in the U.S. 
(Emphasis in original.) The record lacks objective evidence to support the assertions in the letter quoted 
above. Going on record without supporting documentary evidence is not sufficient for purposes of 
meeting the burden of proof in these proceedings. Matter of Sofici, 22 I&N Dec. 158, 165 (Comrnr. 
1998) (citing Matter of Treasure Craft of California, 14 I&N Dec. 190 (Regl. Comrnr. 1972)). 
Executive Director of South Asian Americans Leading Together (SAALT), Takoma Park, 
Maryland, stated: 
Page 11 
I have known [the petitioner] since 2004, and have followed her work in the community 
since that time. Specifically, SAALT has worked in partnership with . . 
Under [the petitioner's] leadership, has emerged as a valuable and important 
resource for [the] Nepali community as well as for the broader South Asian community. 
SAALT's work with and with [the petitioner], in particular, have been 
significant in nature. For example, recently, SAALT chose 
 to be part of a 
group of five organizations around the country to receive skills building and trainings. 
The reason that was selected for this project is in large part due to [the 
petitioner's] leadership ability and potential. In addition, [the petitioner] has served on 
the Advisory Committee for a national coalition of South Asian organization that 
SAALT coordinates. 
Deepa Iyer did not specify how recently the events described above took place. As noted previously, 
new developments after the petition's filing date cannot establish that the petitioner was already eligible 
as of the filing date, nor can they retroactively cause her to become eligible if she was not already 
eligible on the filing date. 
The director, in the RFE, requested documentary evidence to support the claims that 
 had 
made in his earlier letter, regarding the petitioner's role in securing the continued existence of New 
Voices. The petitioner's response did not include the evidence requested. Instead, the petitioner 
submitted a new letter from 
 who asserted that the petitioner "played an important role in 
our fundraising efforts," but that "the Ford Foundation officials we were working with at that time . . . 
may not have been aware of the extent of [the petitioner's] involvement in the renewal process." 
On July 15, 2008, the director denied the petition. The director acknowledged the intrinsic merit and 
national scope of non-profit advocacy work, but found that the petitioner had not sufficiently 
distinguished herself from others in her field. The director noted that much of the petitioner's evidence 
related to events that were non-qualifying because they occurred after the petition's filing date. 
On appeal, the petitioner states: 
Adhikaar and I myself had received many media coverage [sic] prior to the filing date. 
The biggest media coverage on the front age of the City Section of the New York 
Times came in April 2007, and covered Pork done prior to the filing date. 
Additionally, the Leadership Award from the New York Women's Foundation was 
presented in September 2007, but the award decision was made earlier in the year and 
was mostly based on my work prior to the filing date. 
. . . By startingfor Human Rights and Social Justice, I had not only served the 
needs of thousands of community members but also provided paid work opportunities. 
As of the date of filing, -ad hired and trained 3 (three) part-time outreach 
workers and 1 (one) full-time summer intern, in addition to many other volunteers and 
Page 12 
board members. had also trained 10 (ten) bilingual Nepalis in interpretation 
skills, providing a job skill with potential for high remuneration. At the time of the 
petition, I had already raised over $40,000. 
The petitioner provides no documentary support for her claims on appeal. The only specific Adhikaar 
project mentioned in the New York Times article is "a survey of the estimated 30,000 Nepalese who live 
in the city"; the article indicated that Adhikaar "has just begun" that survey. Even then, the Times 
article did not focus on the petitioner or Adhikaar. Rather, the article, entitled "For a People 
Overlooked, A Lens at Last," was about the relative obscurity of New York's Nepalese population. The 
article mentioned the petitioner and Adhikaar primarily in the context of Adhikaar's efforts to document 
that population. The article stated that the pebtioner "&d three other immigrants founded. . 
as an advocacy group in 2005," but there was no mention of any of achievements or projects 
except for the new survey. 
Furthermore, the impact the petitioner cites on appeal is limited and local in nature. While an alien 
might warrant a national interest waiver by creating new employment opportunities, we must consider 
the scale of those opportunities. Not every alien who hires workers is, for that reason, eligible for the 
waiver. The impact of creating three part-time jobs and one short-tern full-time internship is negligible 
on a national scale. 
In a supplemental submission, the petitioner lists other asserted achievements, some of them previously 
documented in the record, such as the Award and the 
scholarship that paid for her graduate studies at WWS. These accomplishments are noted, but the 
petitioner has not demonstrated that she stands out fi-om other leaders of non-profit organizations to an 
extent that would justify a national interest waiver. The petitioner has offered no objective basis for 
comparison between herself and others in similar positions. The petitioner has simply listed her own 
accomplishments and asserted that those achevements qualify her for the waiver. 
As is clear fi-om a plain reading of the statute, it was not the intent of Congress that every person 
qualified to engage in a profession in the United States should be exempt from the requirement of a job 
offer based on national interest. Likewise, it does not appear to have been the intent of Congress to 
grant national interest waivers on the basis of the overall importance of a given profession, rather than 
on the merits of the individual alien. On the basis of the evidence submitted, the petitioner has not 
established that a waiver of the requirement of an approved labor certification will be in the national 
interest of the United States. 
The burden of proof in these proceedings rests solely with the petitioner. Section 291 of the Act, 
8 U.S.C. $ 1361. The petitioner has not sustained that burden. This denial is without prejudice to the 
filing of a new petition by a United States employer accompanied by a labor certification issued by the 
Department of Labor, appropriate supporting evidence and fee. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.