dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Psychology

identifying data deleted to 
prevent clearly unwarranted 
invasion of persod privacy 
~UBCIC COPY 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services 
Office ofAdministrative Appeals MS 2090 
Washington, DC 20529-2090 
U. S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
FILE: Office: TEXAS SERVICE CENTER Date: 
SRC 09 013 51678 
IN RE: 
APR 2 2 2010 
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. $ 1 1 53(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. 5 103.5 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. § 103.5(a)(l)(i). 
U 
Perry Rhew 
Chief, Administrative Appeals Office 
DISCUSSION: The employment-based immigrant visa petition was denied by the Director, Texas 
Service Center, and is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The appeal 
will be dismissed. 
This petition, filed on October 20,2008, seeks to classify the petitioner pursuant to section 203(b)(2) of 
the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. 5 1153(b)(2), as a member of the professions 
holding an advanced degree. Since 2003, the petitioner has been working as a freelance psychologist 
for the Dutch Institute for Forensic Psychology and Psychiatry in the Netherlands evaluating "juvenile 
delinquents for court." 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. 
On appeal, counsel argues that the petitioner will serve the national interest to a substantially greater 
degree than would an available U.S. worker having the same minimum qualifications. Counsel also 
states that the director denied the petition without issuing a request for evidence. The regulation at 
8 C.F.R. 5 103.2(b)(8)(ii) provides: 
If all required initial evidence is not submitted with the application or petition or does not 
demonstrate eligibility, USCIS [U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services] in its discretion 
may deny the application or petition for lack of initial evidence or for ineligibility or request 
that the missing initial evidence be submitted within a specified period of time as determined 
by USCIS. 
The director is not required to issue a request for further information in every potentially deniable 
case. If the director determines that the record lacks initial evidence or does not demonstrate 
eligibility, the cited regulation does not require solicitation of fwther documentation. With regard to 
counsel's concern, it is not clear what remedy would be appropriate beyond the appeal process itself. 
The petitioner has in fact supplemented the record on appeal, and therefore it would serve no useful 
purpose to remand the case simply to afford the petitioner the opportunity to supplement the record 
with new evidence. 
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 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) . . . 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 petitioner received her Master of Science degree in Psychology from Vrije University in the 
Netherlands in 1997. The director found 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 pertinent regulations define the term "national interest." Additionally, Congress 
did not provide a specific definition of the phrase, "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, 101 st Cong., 1 st Sess., 1 1 (1 989). 
A supplementary notice regarding the regulations implementing the Immigration Act of 1990 
(IMMACT), published at 56 Fed. Reg. 60897,60900 (November 29, 1991), states, in pertinent part: 
The Service 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 Dep't. of Transp., 22 I&N Dec. 2 15, 2 17-1 8 (Comm'r. 1998) (hereinafter 
"NYSDOT"), 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. Id. at 217. Next, it must be shown that the proposed benefit will be national 
in scope. Id. 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. Id. at 2 1 7- 1 8. 
It must be noted that, while the national interest waiver hinges onprospective national benefit, it clearly 
must be established that the alien's past record justifies projections of future benefit to the national 
interest. Id. at 219. 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 with no demonstrable prior achievements, and whose benefit to the national interest would 
thus be entirely speculative. Id. 
We also note that the regulation at 8 C.F.R. 3 204.5(k)(2) defines "exceptional ability" as "a degree of 
expertise significantly above that ordinarily encountered" in a given area of endeavor. By statute, 
aliens of exceptional ability are generally subject to the job offerllabor certification requirement; 
they are not exempt by virtue of their exceptional ability. Therefore, whether a given alien seeks 
classification as an alien of exceptional ability, or as a member of the professions holding an 
advanced degree, that alien cannot qualify for a waiver just by demonstrating a degree of expertise 
significantly above that ordinarily encountered in his or her field of expertise. 
With regard to the first factor set forth in NYSDOT, we concur with the director's finding that the 
petitioner works in an area of intrinsic merit, psychology. 
Regarding the second factor in NYSDOT, whether the proposed benefit of the petitioner's work will be 
national in scope, the petitioner submitted two letters from the Spirituality for Kids (SFK) organization 
discussing her prospective employment in the United States. 
Spirituality for Kids (SFK) was started in 2001 by 
 who saw that there 
were many at-risk families looking for quick fixes for problems they faced in their lives 
having to do with: drug abuse, child abuse, violence, crime, gang violence, high drop out 
rates, early pregnancy and more. The curriculum was created by SFK to help to provide these 
students and families the tools to make choices that would require harder work but would 
lead to a more fulfilling life where transformation was created positively in their lives and 
eventually in the world around them. 
Programming is conducted during school, in an after school setting, during the summer and 
led by SFK Teachers, Facilitators, Administrators, Volunteers other community members. 
In our search for a staff evaluator and instructor we have found [the petitioner's] 
qualifications to be unique among her peers . . . . 
Currently we have not been able to find a psychologist[.] Her qualifications to work with our 
students would provide opportunities for growth that we have not yet provided in our 
program. With her profound psycho diagnostic skills, and training working with children and 
juveniles, and her experience training interns, health care professionals and volunteers, [the 
petitioner] would be able to start working as a teacher for SFK and advice [sic] us about 
possible improvements in the program. Once she has gone through this process she will be 
able to train other potential teachers in the Miami area, where there are no trainers available 
yet and the program just started as part of the curriculum in the public school district of Dade 
County. This will help the program expand and reach more counties in Miami and other 
states, with the ultimate goal of reaching kids in the public schools across the country. . . . In 
addition, [the petitioner] is multi-lingual. With her multiple language skills she would be able 
to reach the diverse population in underdeveloped neighborhoods so they can benefit from 
SFK through community centers, and social services. 
In February of this year, we made a presentation before the biannual Opening of Schools 
meeting as well as smaller presentations with key members of the school board. Soon after, 
they were very excited to start curriculum-time programming with us in three classes in two 
different Miami-Dade County Public Schools in addition to our regularly large after-school 
programming of 1 1 classes in 10 different sites. The classes were a great success and we will 
be looking to starting at least six curriculum-time classes in at least 3 schools this fall. 
Together with our after-school programming, we are looking to reach at least 300 children 
for the fall and about 1000 over the school year. 
There is a great need for resiliency among the at-risk children of South Florida. With our 
growth, we are looking to expand more and more throughout the Miami-Dade County Public 
School system and beyond into Broward County and all of South Florida. 
Having considered [the petitioner's] resume, and taking into consideration her qualifications 
and experience as a child psychologist, we would be honored to have her as part of our team. 
Her international experience, her ability to speak four languages coupled with her knowledge 
of different cultures will greatly contribute to the integration of the children of Florida and 
the children in the United States into the mainstream of society. 
Id. at 217, n.3 provides examples of employment where the benefits would not be national in scope: 
For instance, pro bono legal services as a whole serve the national interest, but the impact of 
an individual attorney working pro bono would be so attenuated at the national level as to be 
negligible. Similarly, while education is in the national interest, the impact of a single 
schoolteacher in one elementary school would not be in the national interest for purposes of 
waiving the job offer requirement of section 203(b)(2)(B) of the Act. As another example, 
while nutrition has obvious intrinsic value, the work of one cook in one restaurant could not 
be considered sufficiently in the national interest for purposes of this provision of the Act. 
In finding that the petitioner had not established the proposed benefit of her U.S. employment will be 
national in scope, the director's decision stated: 
Regarding the second factor, "national in scope," you have not persuasively demonstrated 
that the proposed benefit of your prospective employment will be national in scope. You 
have stated that you are to be employed by the "Spirituality for Kids" (SFK) program. This 
program appears to operate in several metropolitan areas in the United States, as well as other 
cities throughout the world. However, relative to your personal emplovment contributions to 
the organization, a letter included in the file from states 
that you would be able to start working as a teacher, and after completing this process, would 
be able to "train other potential teachers in the Miami area." And then "expand and reach 
more counties in Miami and other states, with the ultimate goal of reaching kids in the public 
schools across the country." From the president's statements, it appears that your efforts will 
be initially relegated to South Florida, with the hopes of further expansion. While being 
limited to a particular geographic area is not a sole disqualifier for the "national in scope" 
criteria, there is nothing in the record to suggest that the benefit of your services will extend 
beyond the South Florida area for the foreseeable future. Based on the information presented, 
it has not been demonstrated that the benefit to the country that you will impart will be 
national in scope. 
We affirm the director's findings. On appeal, counsel states: 
In [NYSDOT], the beneficiary's occupation was limited to the geographic area of mew 
York], yet the AAO noted that the correlation between the national goal and the alien's 
activity need not be direct and held the beneficiary's job of maintenance and operation of NY 
bridges and roads was national in scope. Similarly, in this case, although [the petitioner's] 
work may begin in the geographic area of Miami, her work will affect the nation as a whole. 
In NYSDOT, although the alien engineer's employment was "limited to a particular geographic area," 
the AAO found that "New York's bridges and roads connect the state to the national transportation 
system. The proper maintenance and operation of these bridges and roads therefore serve the interests 
of other regions of the country." Id. at 217. For comparison, in the present matter, 
 letter 
indicates that the SFK program in Florida's public school system presently consists of only a handful of 
schools in Miami-Dade County and that it hopes to add "at least six curriculum-time classes in at 
least 3 schools this fall." There is no evidence from the public school administration indicating that 
SFK is being utilized system-wide at the county level, let alone at the state level. Thus, aside from 
impacting classes at a small number of Miami-Dade County schools, the petitioner has not 
established that the benefits resulting from her work as a psychologist for the SFK program would be 
national in scope or otherwise "affect the nation as a whole" (as claimed by counsel). In contrast to 
the present matter in which the petitioner would "start working as a teacher for SFK" at various sites 
in Miami-Dade County with hopes of later expanding the program in other parts of Florida, the 
engineer in NYSDOT was working with New York's established transportation infrastructure which 
already had a tangible impact on the national transportation system. 
Counsel further argues that "Uluvenile delinquency is a national problem, not just local to South 
Florida." The petitioner's appellate submission includes information regarding juvenile crime and its 
associated costs. While juvenile delinquency certainly can be considered a national problem, the 
petitioner has not established that her proposed employment as a teacher or psychologist for the SFK 
program in South Florida would have a national impact on juvenile delinquency rates. Rather, 
unlike the engineer in NYSDOT, her individual impact as a SFK teacher or self-employed 
psychologist would be so attenuated at the national level as to be negligible. 
Counsel also asserts that "in the past four years there has been a mass exodus from Florida, most 
families will relocate to other areas of the country and the children who have had the opportunity to 
benefit from [the petitioner's] work will take this knowledge and experience with them to other parts 
of the country." The petitioner's appellate submission includes three articles discussing a decline in 
Florida's population, but none of these articles demonstrate that Florida has lost a significant 
percentage of its population. Contrary to counsel's claim that recently "there has been a mass exodus 
from Florida," the article in the Palm Beach Post entitled "Exodus from South Florida increasing" 
states: "Experts disagree on whether the new numbers show real population decline or simply 
indicate shifts in the demographic mix. They aren't sure whether they're the start of a long term 
decline or iust a temporary response to a bad economv." Nevertheless, there is no evidence showing 
- 
that the 
 positibn dlscribed in the letters from and 
 or her unspecified 
self-employment as a child psychologist, will provide benefits that are national in scope. Rather, as 
previously noted, her services would be so attenuated at the national level as to be negligible. 
It remains, then, to determine whether the petitioner will benefit the national interest to a greater 
extent than an available U.S. worker with the same minimum qualifications. 
Eligibility for the waiver must rest with the alien's own qualifications rather than with the position 
sought. In other words, we generally do not accept the argument that a given project is so important 
that any alien qualified to work on the project must also qualify for a national interest waiver. Id. at 
218. Moreover, it cannot suffice to state that the alien possesses useful skills, or a "unique 
background." Special or unusual knowledge or training does not inherently meet the national 
interest threshold. The issue of whether similarly-trained workers are available in the United States 
is an issue under the jurisdiction of the Department of Labor. Id. at 221. 
At issue is whether this petitioner's contributions in the field are of such unusual significance that the 
petitioner merits the special benefit of a national interest waiver, over and above the visa 
classification he seeks. By seeking an extra benefit, the petitioner assumes an extra burden of proof. 
A petitioner must demonstrate a past history of achievement with some degree of influence on the 
field as a whole. Id. at 219, n. 6. In evaluating the petitioner's achievements, we note that original 
innovation, such as demonstrated by a patent, is insufficient by itself. 
 Whether the specific 
innovation serves the national interest must be decided on a case-by-case basis. Id at 221, n. 7. 
Parts 5 and 6 of the Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker, identify the petitioner's 
occupation and job title as "Clinical Psychologist." The record, however, does not reflect that the 
petitioner even meets the minimum educational and licensure requirements to practice as a Clinical 
Psychologist in the United states.' Accordingly, it is not apparent that the petitioner will benefit the 
' For "Psychologists," the Department of I,aborqs Occupational Outlook Handbook, 2010-1 1 Edition (accessed at 
http://www.bls.gov/oco/), states that a "doctoral degree usually is required for independent practice as a psychologist" and 
that "[iln clinical, counseling, and school psychology, the requirements for the doctoral degree usually include an 
national interest to a greater extent than an available U.S. clinical psychologist who actually meets 
these minimum qualifications. 
Along with her educational qualifications, training certifications, and documentation pertaining to 
her activities in the field, the petitioner submitted several letters of support. 
June 2006. She was employed as a behavioral expert, developmental and clinical 
psychologist. 
In her function as psychologist she dealt with the assessment of juvenile delinquents and, in 
civil cases, assessing young children in multi-problem families, analyzing these family 
settings in order to enable the Dutch Court to take necessary steps and decisions to punish or 
protect these children. 
Her special expertise was in the field of methodology related to intercultural problem 
solving. [The petitioner] is equiped [sic] with much experience in dealing with people from 
very different cultural backgrounds. She developed very effective, practical and promising 
tools for our organization to deal with intercultural family problems. 
[The petitioner] showed us her very talent and experience in handling delicate cases. She was 
a socially very well equiped [sic] partner in multidisciplinary assessment meetings. 
additional year of post-doctoral supervised experience." [Emphasis added.] The handbook also provides information 
about licensure stating: 
Psychologists in a solo or group practice or those who offer any type of patient care - including clinical, 
counseling, and school psychologists - must meet certification or licensing requirements in all States and the 
District of Columbia. . . . Clinical and counseling psychologists usually need a doctorate in psychology, an 
approved internship, and 1 to 2 years of professional experience. In addition, all States require that applicants 
pass an examination. 
*** 
The National Association of School Psychologists (NASP) awards the Nationally Certified School Psychologist 
(NCSP) designation, which recognizes professional competency in school psychology at a national, rather than 
State, level. Currently, 3 1 States recognize the NCSP and allow those with the certification to transfer 
credentials from one State to another without taking a new certification exam. 
[Emphasis added.] See http:llwww.bls.govloco/ocos056.htm, accessed on April 8, 2010, copy incorporated into the 
record of proceeding. 
As she was my direct colleague psychologist I remember [the petitioner] a highly qualified 
expert. . . . 
does not provide specific examples of how the petitioner's work has influenced the field. 
With regard to the petitioner's behavioral expertise and job experience with the Child Protection 
Service, objective qualifications and experience necessary for the performance of a particular 
occupation can be articulated in an application for alien employment certification. Pursuant to 
NYSDOT, 22 I&N Dec. at 22 1, an alien cannot demonstrate eligibility for the national interest waiver 
simply by establishing a certain level of training, education, or experience that could be articulated 
on an application for employment certification. 
I opine that considering [the petitioner] under a National Interest Waiver would be of 
National Interest and of great contribution to the youths within our region where she would 
likely work. To explain, she has extensive training in normal and deviant child and 
adolescent development, and has spent ten (10) years working with youths who have 
developmental and environmental challenges. Additionally, she has provided services to 
youths and families within the individual, group and milieu modalities, and has extensive 
experience implementing behavioral interventions with parents and teachers. Moreover, her 
international orientation, understanding of culturally diverse issues, and fluency in four (4) 
languages, make her particularly unique in her field. Of note, despite the diversity of our 
State, there is a relative absence of Spanish and Dutch speaking professionals who are 
qualified to, and capable of, providing mental health services. . . . Additionally, despite there 
being an abundance of graduates from Masters Level programs, most do not pursue this line 
of work and neither do they possess the language skills and clinical competencies that [the 
petitioner] demonstrates. Also, her experience with programmatic methodology makes her a 
particularly distinct candidate, as this gives her unique insight in recognizing the need for 
structural changes when such are less apparent to other clinicians. 
Ultimately, there is clearly an immediate need for her services in our community, as not only 
do we currently lack professionals with her impressive qualifications but must respond with 
urgency to the existing mental health needs of the children and families in our country. 
As stated in NYSDOT, 22 I&N Dec. at 221, it cannot suffice to state that the alien possesses useful 
skills, or a "unique background." Special or unusual knowled e or training does not inherently meet 
the national interest threshold. In addition, while 6 asserts that a lack of professionals 
with the petitioner's qualifications is a consideration, NYSDOT specifically rejects that argument. Id. at 
221. When discussing claims that the beneficiary in that case possessed specialized design techniques, 
the AAO asserted that such expertise: 
Page 10 
would appear to be a valid requirement for the petitioner to set forth on an application for a 
labor certification. [The] assertion of a labor shortage, therefore, should be tested through the 
labor certification process. . . . The issue of whether similarly-trained workers are available in 
the U.S. is an issue under the jurisdiction of the Department of Labor. 
Id. at 220-22 1. 
Moreover, the fact that the petitioner has an international background and, thus, is fluent in multiple 
languages including Dutch, Spanish and English, is not evidence that she has made or will make an 
impact on the field of psychological counseling other than to benefit her specific clients. While 
benefiting individual clients has intrinsic merit, the impact is not national in scope. If USCIS were 
to accept that the petitioner's multilingual ability warrants approval of the waiver, USCIS would 
need to approve the waiver for every alien from a non-English speaking country with a degree in a 
profession that provides services to the public (social workers, therapists, doctors, teachers, etc.) 
The petitioner has not established that Congress intended the national interest waiver to serve as a 
blanket waiver for all multilingual aliens providing services to the public. 
Netherlands, states: 
[The petitioner] was my direct colleague from November 2001 until April 2005 when we 
both worked as behavioral experts for the Department of Justice, Child Protection Service in 
Haarlem, The Netherlands. 
At the Child Protection Service [the petitioner] and I used to deal with civil cases, where we 
assessed difficult pedagogical situations children [were] growing up in. We would relate this 
to the developmental level of the child to see if the child's development was at risk and 
intervention by the Dutch government was necessary. We would advise the Dutch court how 
to help the family and the children. Often intensive psycho diagnostic evaluation of the child 
and/or the system around it was necessary in order to subscribe our advi[c]e. 
. Another task was the evaluation of young adolescents who have been in conflict with the 
law. We advised social workers to determine in what way the adolescent would benefit most 
in respect to his development and still feel the consequences of his defiant or delinquent 
behavior. At times we felt the necessity to see the child or adolescent ourselves and to carry 
out a psychodiagnostic evaluation which would result in a diagnosis and advise about the 
punishmentlintervention. 
To keep up to date with the latest theories and trends in our field we attended many 
symposia. [The petitioner's] analytical skills are very well developed and she always found a 
way to translate what she learned in literature or at a conference to the daily practice. She 
translated several diagnostic criteria (from the DSM-IV classification system) of the most 
common disorders (attention deficit hyper activity disorder, borderline personality disorder, 
conduct disorder and oppositional defiant disorder) into behavioral checklists. These 
methodologies are still at great use for the social workers of the Child Protection Service in 
Haarlem in their evaluation of the family situations. 
There is no evidence showing that the petitioner was an originator of the "DSM-IV classification 
system." Accordingly, her translation of this diagnostic material into behavioral checklists for her 
immediate employer does not demonstrate her influence on the field as a whole. 
at The Bascule, Center for Child and Youth 
Psychiatry, and Professor of Post Graduate Training, Regional Institutions for Continuing Education 
and Training (RINO), states: 
In the years that [the petitioner] worked at the Institute, where her main focus was on the 
diagnostic evaluation and treatment of children and adolescents with very complex 
psychiatric disorders, she proved to be a very talented psychologist. 
In our opinion, [the petitioner's] expertise is invaluable in any psychiatric setting whether it 
be forensic, in- or outpatient. [The petitioner] possesses the unique quality of being able to 
combine clinical knowledge and experience with personal characteristics such as reliability, 
candor, and openness - important prerequisites that enable a psychologist to contribute to the 
recovery of young clients and their parents. 
As previously discussed, it cannot suffice to state that the alien possesses useful skills, or a "unique 
background." Special or unusual knowledge or training does not inherently meet the national 
interest threshold. NYSDOT, 22 I&N Dec. at 221. 
Psychotherapist and Behavioral Therapist, The Bascule 
Center for Child and Youth Psychiatry, Amsterdam, states: 
From November 1999 until November 2001 I . . . had the pleasure of working together with 
[the petitioner] at the Peadological Institute (PI) in Duivendrecht, the Netherlands. PI has 
been known since 2004 as "The Bascule," Center for Child and Youth Psychiatry . . . . 
[The petitioner] developed a Diagnostics training to train students in the correct use of 
diagnostic tools and tests, such as intelligence tests, personality tests and ortho-didactic tests. 
She taught them in the various backgrounds and theories on the basis of which these tests 
were developed. . . . [The petitioner] later developed this diagnostics training into a course 
for psycho-diagnostics for children and youth. This course is now taught yearly at the post- 
graduate course for "health care psychologists" (RINO). 
[The petitioner] initiated an outpatient treatment center for children with a mental handicap 
and complex psychiatric disorders. The Peadological Institute initiated this out patient 
treatment center to fulfill the need for specialized psychiatric help for children with an 
intellectual handicap. [The petitioner] has actively participated in developing a methodology, 
which makes it possible to diagnose and treat this group of children. Because of her effort, 
intellectually challenged children can now benefit from evidence based treatment protocols. 
As part of her regular job responsibilities [the petitioner] regularly participated in research 
projects from the VU University in Amsterdam. She also participated in PI research, for 
example a research into attachment representations of parents and attachment patterns of 
these parents with their own children. 
=~ states the petitioner developed a diagnostics training course taught "yearly at the post- 
graduate course for 'health care psych~logists' (RINO)." The record includes a copy of the course 
material reflecting this five-day course was also prepared by While the petitioner 
helped contribute to the course material at the institution where she trained, there is no evidence 
showing that the course material is being utilized by institutions with which the petitioner and Dr. 
are not directly affiliated or that it has otherwise had a significant national impact in the 
field. With regard to comments about the petitioner's development of an outpatient 
treatment program at the Peadological Institute, there is no evidence demonstrating that the 
petitioner's diagnosis and treatment methodologies have had a tangible national impact or otherwise 
significantly influenced treatment methodologies utilized by others throughout her field. Finally, 
regarding the research projects in which the petitioner was involved at VU University in Amsterdam, 
there is no evidence showing that she published the results of her work, that her work was frequently 
cited by independent researchers, or that her work has otherwise significantly influenced her field as 
a whole. 
I have worked with [the petitioner] from January 4th 1998 until the end of December 1999 in 
a private psychology practice; "practice for psychotherapy Amsterdam." . . . We both 
worked with adults at the time we were co-workers and it was [the petitioner's] first job in 
her field. Despite her limited experience at the time, her diagnostic and social skills were 
well developed . . . . Since we both had a great passion for working with children, we created 
a plan to develop an outpatient diagnostic and treatment center for children. Before we could 
work out our plan fully, [the petitioner] was accepted in a post graduate professional training 
program for health care professionals so she left the practice.. . . I stayed long enough to see 
the children's center become effective and it still is. 
While the petitioner assisted in developing an outpatient diagnostic and treatment center 
for children, there is no evidence demonstrating that the petitioner's work had a tangible national 
impact or otherwise significantly influenced treatment methodologies in her field. 
The director denied the petition stating that the petitioner had not established that a waiver of the 
required job offer and approved employment certification would be in the national interest of the 
United States. The director's decision noted a lack of evidence showing that the petitioner's 
contributions have had such an impact on the field of clinical psychology that they clearly present a 
significant benefit to the field as a whole. 
On appeal, the petitioner submits additional letters of support. 
To clarify, it is not that there is a shortage of Master's level graduates in our country that 
choose to avoid this line of work despite being qualified, but rather they lack the requisite 
skills (i.e. language and clinical competencies) from the onset to even consider it an option. 
Hence, it is not an issue of "shortage" but rather a "shortage of unique professional skills, 
knowledge, and tools" that preclude these graduates from even being considered for such 
positions in the first place. Essentially, the methodologies and tools brought by [the 
petitioner] to our profession because of her unique knowledge and abilities (as discussed in 
my previous letter), place her in the position to significantly benefit the field of Psychology 
in an area that serves the national interest. Juvenile delinquency is a national problem, not a 
problem unique to South Florida. 
At this point I would like to emphasize that [the petitioner] possesses markedly unique skills, 
abilities, and professional tools that set her apart from other Master's level graduates. That is, 
she has extensive training in normal and deviant child and adolescent development, and has 
spent ten (10) years working with youths who have developmental and environmental 
challenges. Also, she has provided services to youths and families within the individual, 
group and milieu modalities, and has extensive experience implementing behavioral 
interventions with parents and teachers. In addition, her international orientation, 
understanding of culturally diverse issues, and fluency in four (4) languages, make her a 
particularly distinct professional. Moreover, her experience with programmatic methodology 
gives her unique insight in recognizing the need for structural changes when such are less 
apparent to other clinicians. 
does not provide specific examples of how the petitioner's work has influenced the 
field as a whole. As previously discussed, it cannot suffice to state that the alien possesses useful 
skills, or a "unique background:" Special or unusual knowledge or training does no; inherent1 meet 
the national interest threshold. NYSDOT, 22 I&N Dec. at 221. Moreover, with regard to 
Namer's observation that the petitioner has ten years of experience in her field, we note that having 
"at least ten years of full-time experience in the occupation" relates to the regulatory criteria for 
classification as an alien of exceptional ability, a classification that normally requires an approved 
labor certification. 8 C.F.R. 4 204.5(k)(3)(ii). We cannot conclude that meeting one, two, or even 
the requisite three criteria for classification as an alien of exceptional ability warrants a waiver of the 
labor certification requirement in the national interest. By statute, "exceptional ability" is not, by 
itself sufficient cause for a national interest waiver. NYSDOT, 22 I&N Dec. at 218. Thus, the 
beneJit which the alien presents to her field of endeavor must greatly exceed the "achievements and 
significant contributions" contemplated for that classification. Id.; see also id. at 222. 
- of Community and Corporate Services, Center for Creative Living, Coral 
- 
Springs, Florida, states: 
In talking to [the petitioner], I learned that she had a primary interest and focus in the area of 
juvenile delinquency and conduct disorder on the part of adolescents and had done 
significant work in the court system of the Netherlands. She spoke about her involvement in 
an integrated system where psychologists worked directly with social workers to obtain 
optimal success in both the diagnosis and treatment of the identified, troubled adolescents 
who she worked with. [The petitioner] was involved in the diagnostic procedures in 
identifying the specific emotional and cognitive difficulties these teenage individuals had 
which contributed to their acting out and anti-social behavior. She also became quite versed 
in the area of dual diagnosis, i.e. treating children and adolescents who were significantly 
impaired and who also showed acting-out behaviorallsevere emotional problems. So with this 
in mind, in the primary population of both academic interest and professional interest, i.e. 14- 
17 year old youth who are leaning toward conduct disorderldeveloping anti-social orientation 
toward the world, [the petitioner] brings to the table a diverse array of both academic skills 
and enriched work experience in working with this population in the Netherlands. 
Along with her training and work with delinquent youth, she also is trained in the forensic 
family court system as a diagnostician and identification person regarding the stress and 
conflict children go through during divorce resulting in appropriate placement in the child's 
best interest for which parent would be able to psychologically take care of the child. 
recounts information provided to him by the petitioner, but he does not provide specific 
examples of how the petitioner's work has influenced the field as a whole. As previously noted, it 
cannot suffice to state that the alien possesses useful skills or special training. Regardless of the alien's 
particular experience or skills, even assuming they are unique, the benefit the alien's skills or 
background will provide to the United States must also considerably outweigh the inherent national 
interest in protecting U.S. workers through the labor certification process. NYSDOT, 22 I&N Dec. at 
221. 
states: 
Page 15 
I was requested to address the area of the possible contribution of the applicant in serving the 
national interest of the United States . . . . I reviewed the letter of [the petitioner] dated 
October 17,2008 and her professional curriculum vita. 
Based upon a review of the above documents, it is my opinion that the applicant possesses 
specialized skills and training far above the level of most other individuals in the mental 
health field. 
Although it may be necessary for the applicant to start at a local level in the implementation 
of her therapeutic approaches, it would likely be only a matter of time before she would be 
requested at a national level to consult with various juvenile programs. 
Aside from the preceding observations, much of 
 letter focuses on the petitioner's 
educational qualifications, experience with juveniles, and fluency in multiple languages. As stated in 
NYSDOT, 22 I&N Dec. at 221, it cannot suffice to state that the alien possesses useful skills, or a 
"unique background." Specialized skills, experience, and educational training do not inherently meet 
the national interest threshold. points out that "it may be necessary for the applicant to 
start at a local level in the implementation of her therapeutic approaches." He then opines that "it 
would likely be only a matter of time before she would be requested at a national level to consult 
with various juvenile programs." ,4 petitioner, however, cannot file a petition under this 
classification based on the expectation of future eligibility. See Matter of Katigbak, 14 I&N Dec. 45, 
49 (Reg'l. Comm'r. 1971). 
In her second letter, states: 
The letter of the USCIS suggests that the development of the behavioral checklists by [the 
petitioner] only contributed to one institution (the Child Protection Service in Haarlem). 
Perhaps I was not specific in my previous letter but I strongly disagree with this assumption. 
These checklists are not only used in one institution, but are widely used in all the 22 offices 
of the Child Protection Service whose objective is to protect children in the entire Country. 
The checklists are also used by Clinical psychologists in other institutions. I, for example, 
also use these checklists in my current job at "de Waag," a center for Forensic Psychology to 
guide me in making more accurate diagnosis of disorders and subsequently better indications 
for treatment. In my opinion she profoundly advanced the field of Clinical Psychology with 
the methodology she developed. 
We note that 
 initial letter stated that the diagnostic criteria in the petitioner's checklists 
originated "from the DSM-IV classification system." 
 There is no evidence showing that the 
petitioner was the original developer of the DSM-IV classification system that she translated into 
behavioral checklists for use by the Child Protection Service. The petitioner's transcription of 
diagnostic criteria developed by others into checklists utilized by her employing agency does not 
demonstrate her influence on the field as a whole. Moreover, aside from herself, does not 
identify the "Clinical psychologists in other institutions" who utilize the behavioral checklists. 
I stated . . . that [the petitioner] developed a post graduate course regarding psycho- 
diagnostics for children and youth. 
The USCIS understood from my letter that this course is only used in one institution and 
therefore their conclusion is that it has made no significant impact to the field of Clinical 
psychology. I strongly disagree with this statement. The objective of the course and the 
impact of [the petitioner's] contributions to the field of psychology are, in my opinion, 
misunderstood and underestimated by the reviewing authority. 
The course is taught in a 2 year advanced level educational program (post Masters) for 
Health care psychologists. These psychologists are taught valuable and extensive diagnostic 
skills which they take into their future careers in the field of Clinical psychology. These 
psychologists use the acquired skills in the different institutions where they are employed 
during and after their post graduate education. . . . Therefore, the contribution of [the 
petitioner] does impact the field of endeavor as a whole and is not only limited to one 
institution. 
While the petitioner helped Dr. prepare the preceding five-day course taught at the RINO, 
there is no evidence showing that the course material is being utilized by educational institutions 
with which the petitioner is not directly affiliated or that it has otherwise had a significant national 
impact in the field as a whole. Aside from the students who attend this course, there is no evidence 
demonstrating its impact on fully trained psychologists in the field. In this instance, the petitioner 
has not established that her assistance in the preparation of material for a single training course 
inherently serves the national interest to an extent that justifies a waiver of the job offer requirement. 
In evaluating the reference letters, we note that the letters discussing the petitioner's work 
experience, education, and training are less persuasive than letters that provide specific examples of 
how the petitioner has influenced her field. In addition, letters from independent references who 
were previously aware of the petitioner through her reputation as a psychologist and who have 
applied her work are far more persuasive than letters from independent references who were not 
previously aware of the petitioner and are merely responding to a solicitation to review her 
curriculum vitae and work and provide an opinion based solely on this review. 
USCIS may, in its discretion, use as advisory opinion statements submitted as expert testimony. See 
Matter of Caron International, 19 I&N Dec. 791, 795 (Commr. 1988). However, USCIS is 
ultimately responsible for making the final determination regarding an alien's eligibility for the 
benefit sought. Id. The submission of letters of support from individuals selected by the petitioner 
is not presumptive evidence of eligibility; USCIS may evaluate the content of those letters as to 
whether they support the alien's eligibility. See id. at 795. USCIS may even give less weight to an 
Page 17 
opinion that is not corroborated, in accord with other information or is in any way questionable. Id. 
at 795; see also Matter of SofJici, 22 I&N Dec. 158, 165 (Commr. 1998) (citing Matter of Treasure 
Craft of California, 14 I&N Dec. 190 (Regl. Commr. 1972)). In this case, the content of the letters 
of support submitted by the petitioner does not establish that her work at the time of filing the 
petition had already had a significant national impact or otherwise influenced her field as a whole. 
With regard to the petitioner's "position of Clinical psychologist" with SFK, counsel argues that 
labor certification delays would greatly impact the petitioner's work. Nothing in the legislative 
history suggests that the national interest waiver was intended simply as a means for employers (or self- 
petitioning aliens) to avoid the inconvenience of the labor certification process. NYSDOT, 22 I&N 
Dec. at 223. 
While petitioner has earned the admiration of her colleagues, she has not established that her past 
record of achievement is at a level that would justify a waiver of the job offer requirement which, by 
law, normally attaches to the visa classification sought by the petitioner. We note that the petitioner 
need not demonstrate notoriety on the scale of national acclaim, but the national interest waiver 
contemplates that her influence be national in scope. NYSDOT, 22 I&N Dec. at 217 n.3. More 
specifically, the petitioner "must clearly present a significant benefit to the field of endeavor." Id. at 
218. See also id. at 219 n.6 (the alien must have "a past history of demonstrable achievement with 
some degree of influence on the field as a whole.") 
As is clear from a plain reading of the statute, it was not the intent of Congress that every alien holding 
an advanced degree 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 occupation, 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 alien employment 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 an alien employment certification certified by the Department of Labor, appropriate supporting 
evidence and fee. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.