dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Nursing

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: JULY 11, 2024 In Re: 31285953 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, a nurse, seeks employment-based second preference (EB-2) immigrant classification 
as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree or an individual of exceptional ability, 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 the Petitioner did not qualify 
for EB-2 classification and did not establish 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. 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 qualify for EB-2 visa classification, a petitioner must establish they are an advanced degree 
professional or an individual of exceptional ability in the sciences, arts, or business. Section 
203(b )(2)(A) of the Act. 
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: 
1 See Flores v. Garland, 72 F.4th 85, 88 (5th Cir. 2023) (joining the Ninth, Eleventh, and D.C. Circuit Courts (and Third 
in an unpublished decision) in concluding that USCIS' decision to grant or deny a national interest waiver is discretionary 
in nature). 
• 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. 
Id. 
II. ANALYSIS 
The Petitioner is a nurse who has worked in her field for over ten years. In her business plan, the 
Petitioner described her proposed endeavor as "providing high-quality, personalized nursing services 
to patients in the U.S." and teaching at health education institutions. The Petitioner proposed to work 
at "general healthcare institutions in the U.S." 
A. EB-2 Classification 
The Director determined the Petitioner was not eligible for EB-2 classification as a member of the 
professions holding an advanced degree or an individual of exceptional ability. As the Petitioner is 
not eligible for a national interest waiver for the reasons discussed below, we do not reach and hereby 
reserve our determination of her eligibility for EB-2 classification. See INS v. Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. 
24, 25 (1976) (stating that "courts and agencies are not required to make findings on issues the decision 
of which is unnecessary to the results they reach"); see also Matter ofL-A-C-, 26 I&N Dec. 516, 526 
n.7 (BIA 2015) ( declining to reach alternative issues on appeal where an applicant is otherwise 
ineligible). 
B. National Interest Waiver: Substantial Merit and National Importance 
The first prong in the Dhanasar analytical framework for evaluating national interest waivers is 
substantial merit and national importance. Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. This prong focuses on the 
specific endeavor that the individual proposes to undertake. Id. The endeavor's merit may be 
demonstrated in a range of areas such as business, entrepreneurialism, science, technology, culture, 
health, or education. Id. The Director determined the Petitioner did not describe her proposed 
endeavor with enough specificity to assess if it had substantial merit. We disagree. The Petitioner 
sufficiently described her proposed endeavor in her business plan and submitted numerous articles 
concerning the importance of nursing to the nation's healthcare system. The Petitioner has established 
that her proposed endeavor has substantial merit. 
The Director also concluded the Petitioner did not establish the national importance of her proposed 
endeavor. In determining whether the proposed endeavor has national importance, we consider its 
potential prospective impact. Id. This consideration may include whether the proposed endeavor has 
significant potential to employ U.S. workers (particularly in an economically depressed area), has 
other substantial positive economic effects, has national or even global implications within the field, 
or other broader implications indicating national importance. Id. at 889-90. The Director determined 
the Petitioner did not establish her proposed endeavor would impact her field more broadly at a level 
commensurate with national importance. 
2 
On appeal, the Petitioner asserts her proposed endeavor has national importance because it aligns with 
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services initiatives. Specifically, the Petitioner claims that by 
providing high-level nursing care and healthcare service improvements, she will support the National 
Quality Strategy of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) and Centers for Disease 
Control (CDC) guidelines. The Petitioner does not, however, specify how her proposed endeavor 
would impact CMS, CDC, or HHS more broadly to impact her field apart from her compliance with 
national standards in her work with individual patients and students. The assessment of national 
importance does not focus on the importance of national institutions or issues in the field, but rather 
"focuses on the specific endeavor that the foreign national proposes to undertake." Id. at 889. 
The Petitioner also claims her proposed endeavor will significantly impact the U.S. economy because 
the benefits of her work "will ripple throughout large-scale health service networks and the hospitals 
industry as a whole" and as companies increase revenues, they will expand their operations and create 
new jobs. The Petitioner states she intends to work in Florida where hospitals contributed nearly $178 
billion in economic output in 2021 and employed 322,000 Floridians. The Petitioner claims her work 
will help strengthen the growth of the hospitals industry in Florida and nationwide where it generated 
$1.3 trillion in revenue in 2022. The size and growth of the hospitals industry does not establish the 
national importance of the Petitioner's specific proposed endeavor. The Petitioner does not 
demonstrate how her work with individual patients and students would impact the hospitals industry 
more broadly through, for example, medical advances or other national implications. See id. (stating 
an endeavor "may have national or even global implications within a particular field, such as those 
resulting from improved manufacturing processes or medical advances") 
The Petitioner further asserts that with her experience implementing patient safety procedures and 
quality healthcare services she can contribute to increased efficiency and organization in healthcare 
that will increase the productivity of U.S. hospitals. The Petitioner does not demonstrate how, as an 
individual nurse and teacher, she would make such contributions beyond the specific hospitals or other 
healthcare facilities at which she would work to impact her field more broadly. The Petitioner also 
claims her proposed endeavor will operate in "a key sector of the national economy" and "nursing has 
tremendous potential in terms of generating economic growth in the U.S." The Petitioner does not 
specify how her work with individual patients and students would have substantial positive economic 
effects. 
The Petitioner also claims her proposed endeavor has national importance because it would help meet 
an urgent shortage of nursing professionals. The Petitioner claims she would "fill a gap in the market 
which cannot be filled by an unskilled worker." The Petitioner also submitted articles regarding the 
shortage of nurses in the United States. In assessing national importance, we do not focus on the 
importance of issues affecting a field, but focus on a petitioner's specific proposed endeavor. Id. The 
Petitioner does not demonstrate how her work as an individual nurse and teacher would significantly 
address a nationwide shortage of nursing professionals or otherwise impact her field more broadly. 
The Petitioner states that through her teaching, she will "transfer the necessary skills and knowledge 
to help create and maintain a qualified workforce, thereby fulfilling industry needs and benefiting the 
United States' economic and social needs." In Dhanasar we determined 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. Here, the Petitioner has not established that her proposed endeavor 
3 
would sufficiently extend beyond her individual students to impact her field more broadly at a level 
commensurate with national importance. 
In sum, the relevant evidence demonstrates the substantial merit of the Petitioner's proposed work in 
her field but does not establish the national importance of her specific proposed endeavor. 
Consequently, she does not meet the first prong of the Dhanasar framework. 
B. The Remaining Dhanasar Prongs 
As this issue is dis positive of the Petitioner's appeal, we decline to reach and hereby reserve 
determination of her eligibility under the second and third prongs of the Dhanasar framework. See 
INS v. Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. at 25; see also Matter ofL-A-C-, 26 I&N Dec. at 526 n.7. 
III. CONCLUSION 
The 
Petitioner has not established the national importance of her proposed endeavor and does not meet 
the first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework. Consequently, she has not demonstrated that 
she is eligible for or merits a waiver of the job offer requirement in the national interest as a matter of 
discretion. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
4