dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Public Health

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
InRe: 13117701 
Appeal of Nebraska Service Center Decision 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date : JUNE 24, 2021 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker (Advanced Degree, Exceptional Ability, National 
Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, a public health specialist, seeks second preference immigrant classification as a 
member of the professions holding an advanced degree, as well as a national interest waiver of the job 
offer requirement attached to this EB-2 classification. See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) 
section 203(b )(2), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b )(2). 
The Director of the Nebraska Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the Petitioner qualified 
for classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree, but that he had not 
established that a waiver of the required job offer, and thus of the labor certification, would be in the 
national interest. 
On appeal, the Petitioner submits additional documentation and a brief asserting that he is eligible for 
a national interest waiver. 
In these proceedings, it is the petitioner's burden to establish eligibility for the immigration benefit 
sought. Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361. Upon de novo review, we will dismiss the appeal. 
I. LAW 
To establish eligibility for a national interest waiver, a petitioner must first demonstrate qualification 
for the underlying EB-2 visa classification, as either an advanced degree professional or an individual 
of exceptional ability in the sciences, arts, or business. Because this classification requires that the 
individual's services be sought by a U.S . employer, a separate showing is required to establish that a 
waiver of the job offer requirement is in the national interest. 
Section 203(b) of the Act sets out this sequential framework: 
(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 ofjob offer-
(i) National interest waiver. ... [T]he 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. 
While neither the statute nor the pertinent regulations define the term "national interest," we set forth 
a framework for adjudicating national interest waiver petitions in the precedent decision Matter of 
Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. 884 (AAO 2016). 1 Dhanasar states that after a petitioner has established 
eligibility for EB-2 classification, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) may, as matter 
of discretion 2, grant a national interest waiver if the petitioner demonstrates: (1) that the foreign 
national's proposed endeavor has both substantial merit and national importance; (2) that the foreign 
national is well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor; and (3) that, on balance, it would be 
beneficial to the United States to waive the requirements of a job offer and thus of a labor certification. 
The first prong, substantial merit and national importance, focuses on the specific endeavor that the 
foreign national proposes to undertake. The endeavor's merit may be demonstrated in a range of areas 
such as business, entrepreneurialism, science, technology, culture, health, or education. In 
determining whether the proposed endeavor has national importance, we consider its potential 
prospective impact. 
The second prong shifts the focus from the proposed endeavor to the foreign national. To determine 
whether he or she is well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor, we consider factors including, 
but not limited to: the individual's education, skills, knowledge and record of success in related or 
similar efforts; a model or plan for future activities; any progress towards achieving the proposed 
endeavor; and the interest of potential customers, users, investors, or other relevant entities or 
individuals. 
The third prong requires the petitioner to demonstrate that, on balance, it would be beneficial to the 
United States to waive the requirements of a job offer and thus of a labor certification. In performing 
this analysis, USCIS may evaluate factors such as: whether, in light of the nature of the foreign 
national's qualifications or the proposed endeavor, it would be impractical either for the foreign 
national to secure a job offer or for the petitioner to obtain a labor certification; whether, even assuming 
1 In announcing this new framework. we vacated our prior precedent decision, Matter of New York State Department of 
Transportation. 22 l&N Dec. 215 (Act. Assoc. Comm'r 1998) (NYSDOT). 
2 See also Poursina v. USC1S. No. 17-16579, 2019 WL 4051593 (Aug. 28, 2019) (finding USCIS' decision to grant or 
deny a national interest waiver to be discretionary in nature). 
2 
that other qualified U.S. workers are available, the United States would still benefit from the foreign 
national's contributions; and whether the national interest in the foreign national's contributions is 
sufficiently urgent to warrant forgoing the labor certification process. In each case, the factor(s) 
considered must, taken together, indicate that on balance, it would be beneficial to the United States 
to waive the requirements of a job offer and thus of a labor certification. 3 
II. ANALYSIS 
The Director found that the Petitioner qualifies as a member of the professions holding an advanced 
degree. The remaining issue to be determined is whether the Petitioner has established that a waiver of 
the requirement of a job offer, and thus a labor certification, would be in the national interest. For the 
reasons discussed below, we agree with the Director that the Petitioner has not sufficiently 
demonstrated the national importance of his proposed endeavor under the first prong of the Dhanasar 
analytical framework. 
Regarding his claim of eligibility under Dhanasar's first prong, the Petitioner initially asserted that he 
intended "to provide my expertise to Federal, States and Territorial partners to protect fellow Americans 
from falling sick from vaccine-preventable diseases; support States, Territories and other partners to carry 
out projects to improve vaccination access and uptake." He further indicated: "I am very confident that 
I would be able to support Government of the United States of America to reach the disease reduction 
targets and able to manage serious human communicable and infectious diseases that vaccines prevent 
their symptoms, risks, possible complications and illnesses effectively." In addition, the Petitioner stated: 
"I am very much interested to work with public health agencies of the United States of America in 
achieving vaccination coverage goals and vaccine preventable disease reduction targets. I find profound 
interest and committed to work in preventing infectious and communicable diseases." Furthermore, the 
Petitioner noted that he was "willing to work with public health agencies" in "activities focusing [on] 
preventing diseases." 
The Director issued a request for evidence (RFE) asking the Petitioner to provide clarification as to 
his proposed endeavor in the United States. He was informed that he should submit a "detailed 
description of the proposed endeavor and why it is of national importance." 
In response to the Director's RFE, the Petitioner indicated that he "started applying for positions in the 
USA as non-citizen in some organizations" and that he planned to "continue to look for job 
announcement/posting" in order to obtain "a suitable position immediately after my immigration to 
USA."4 The Petitioner explained that his career plans included pursuing work for the "Centers for 
Disease Control and Prevention" (CDC), "non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and foundations who 
operate in and from the USA," the "United States Agency for International Development (USAID)," 
United Nations (UN) organizations and their affiliates based in the USA, and "universities of the USA" 
3 See Dhanasar, 26 T&N Dec. at 888-91, for elaboration on these three prongs. 
4 As the Petitioner is applying for a waiver of the job offer requirement, it is not necessary for him to have a job offer from 
a specific employer. However, we will consider information about his prospective positions to illustrate the capacity in 
which he intends to work in order to determine whether his proposed endeavor meets the requirements of the Dhanasar 
analytical framework. 
3 
The record includes information about U.S. immigration, China's pos1t10n as a global leader in 
scientific research, technological advances in Asia as a challenge to U.S. science and technology 
leadership, the link between education and skill development, the public health surveillance workforce 
of the future, and the cost of unvaccinated adults to the U.S. economy. In addition, the Petitioner 
provided articles discussing public health and the U.S. economy, the U.S. President's Emergency Plan 
for AIDS Relief: public health in a global context, vaccine safety communication, modernization of 
the U.S. immigration system, the CDC's Vaccines for Children Program, worker illness and injury 
costs, the Ebola outbreak in West Africa, and a vaccine-derived poliovirus outbreak in the Lao 
People's Democratic Republic. He also submitted information about the World Health Organization 
(WHO), U.S. engagement in global health efforts, immunization safety surveillance, USAID and its 
health initiatives in Cambodia, U.S. relations with Cambodia, the public health workforce shortage, 
CDC immunization efforts, WHO measles vaccination campaigns, and immunization and infectious 
diseases. 5 
The Petitioner also provided a February 2020 letter from [ a professor of political 
science at I I University, asserting that the Petitioner satisfies Dhanasar's first prong "because 
his proposed employment field - public health with special emphases on preventing and containing 
communicable diseases; immunization; and maternal and child health - has substantial intrinsic merit 
and is national in scope." 6 "Substantial intrinsic merit" ( emphasis added) and "national in scope" are 
terms set forth in the first prong of the vacated NYSDOT framework rather than the first prong of the 
Dhanasar precedent decision. Regardless, the issue here is not the substantial merit and national 
importance of the field of public health or its sub-fields such as disease prevention, immunization, or 
maternal and pediatric health, but rather the substantial merit and national importance of the specific 
endeavor the Petitioner proposes to undertake. 
In the decision denying the petition, the Director acknowledged the Petitioner's intention to work in the 
field of public health in the United States, but concluded that he "did not provide a detailed description 
of his proposed undertaking or venture" and that "the exact nature of [his] proposed endeavor is not 
apparent." 7 The Director farther stated that the Petitioner had not sufficiently demonstrated his proposed 
endeavor stands to have broader implications in the field, significant potential to employ U.S. workers, 
substantial positive economic effects, or a broader impact on societal welfare. 
With the appeal, the Petitioner submits online job portal information indicating that he has applied to 
positions at the United Nations Foundation (policy adviser), United Nations Children's Fund (health 
adviser), Lowell Community Health Center (immunization coordinator), John Snow Inc. (evaluation and 
data specialist), and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. The Petitioner, however, has not sufficiently 
identified his proposed work for these organizations or shown that the specific public health projects 
he plans to undertake support a finding of national importance. 
In determining national importance, the relevant question is not the importance of the field, industry, 
or profession in which the individual will work; instead we focus on the "the specific endeavor that 
5 While this documentation helps show the substantial merit of different types of work in the public health field. the 
Petitioner has not identified the specific public health projects he plans to undertake in the United States. 
6 1 _ I a political science scholar, does not claim to be an expe1i in U.S. public health matters. 
7 In Dhanasar. we held that a petitioner must identify "the specific endeavor that the foreign national proposes to 
undertake." Id. at 889. 
4 
the foreign national proposes to undertake." See Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. In Dhanasar , we 
further noted that "we look for broader implications" of the proposed endeavor and that "[a]n 
undertaking may have national importance for example, because it has national or even global 
implications within a particular field." Id. We also stated that "[a]n endeavor that has significant 
potential to employ U.S. workers or has other substantial positive economic effects, particularly in an 
economically depressed area, for instance, may well be understood to have national importance." Id. 
at 890. 
In his appeal brief, the Petitioner asserts that he "is an expert in infectious diseases having spent over 20 
years with the WHO" and that he has the requisite "education, skills, knowledge and a prior record of 
success" in his field. The Petitioner's skills, knowledge, and professional accomplishments relate to the 
second prong of the Dhanasar framework, which "shifts the focus from the proposed endeavor to the 
foreign national." Id. at 890. The issue here is whether the specific endeavor that he proposes to 
undertake has national importance under Dhanasar' s first prong . 
Furthermore, the Petitioner points to "the medical and economic consequences of the coronavirus 
pandemic now ravaging the United States - a situation so dire that we stand on the precipice of economic 
collapse, the death of more than 100,000 Americans and tens of thousands of survivors of the virus who 
will live with the collateral medical ailments resulting from this virus." He further states: "The situation 
is one that is so dire that on May 4, 2020 of bipartisan bill was introduced in the Senate seeking to 
recapture 40,000 visas for doctors and nurses. A similar bill was introduced in the House on May 8, 
2020." The appellate submission includes a May 2020 article, entitled "Bill Would Recapture 40,000 
Green Cards for Doctors and Nurses." This article indicates that "[t]he growing shortage of doctors 
and nurses over the past decade has been exacerbated by the COVID-19 crisis." 8 The Petitioner, 
however, does not explain the public health capacity in which he will work to address the U.S. 
coronavirus pandemic, nor has he demonstrated the national importance of the specific projects he plans 
to undertake. 
To evaluate whether the Petitioner's proposed endeavor satisfies the national importance requirement 
we look to evidence documenting the "potential prospective impact" of his work. Although the 
Petitioner's statements reflect his intention to provide public health services for his future U.S. 
employer, he has not offered sufficient information and evidence to demonstrate that the prospective 
impact of his proposed endeavor rises to the level of national importance. 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, we conclude the record does not show 
that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor stands to sufficiently extend beyond his prospective employers 
and their activities to impact the field of public health more broadly at a level commensurate with 
national importance. 
Furthermore, the Petitioner has not demonstrated that the specific endeavor he proposes to undertake 
has significant potential to employ U.S. workers or otherwise offers substantial positive economic 
8 The U.S. Department of Labor addresses shortages of qualified workers through the labor certification process. 
Additionally , in Section 5 of the Nursing Relief for Disadvantaged Areas Act of 1999, Pub. L. 106-95 (November 12, 
1999), Congress specifically amended the Immigration and Nationality Act by adding section 203(b )(2)(B)(ii) to create 
special waiver provisions for certain physicians in underserved areas. This exception is limited to physicians who follow 
specific requirements set forth in the regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 204.12. 
5 
effects for our nation. Without sufficient information or evidence regarding any projected U.S. economic 
impact or job creation attributable to his future work, the record does not show that benefits to the U.S. 
regional or national economy resulting from the Petitioner 's public health projects would reach the level 
of "substantial positive economic effects" contemplated by Dhanasar. Id. at 890. Accordingly , the 
Petitioner 's propos ed work does not meet the first prong of the Dhanasar framework. 
Because the documentation in the record does not establish the national importance of his proposed 
endeavor as required by the first prong of the Dhanasar precedent decision, the Petitioner has not 
demonstrated eligibility for a national interest waiver. Further analysis of his eligibility under the second 
and third prongs outlined in Dhanasar, therefore, would serve no meaningful purpose. 
III. CONCLUSION 
As the Petitioner has not met the requisite first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework, we conclude 
that he has not established he is eligible for or otherwise merits a national interest waiver as a matter 
of discretion . The appeal will be dismissed for the above stated reasons , with each considered as an 
independent and alternate basis for the decision . 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
6