dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Public Relations

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 12305031 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date : JUNE 9, 2021 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker (Advanced Degree, Exceptional Ability, National 
Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, a public relations 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 Texas Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the Petitioner qualified 
for classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree but that the Petitioner 
had not established that a waiver of the required job offer, and thus of the labor certification, would 
be in the national interest. 
In these proceedings, it is the Petitioner's burden to establish eligibility for the requested benefit. 
Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S .C. § 1361. Upon de nova 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. ... 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. 
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 a 
matter of discretion, 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 
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) 
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 
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. 2 
II. ANALYSIS 
The Director found that the Petitioner qualifies as a member of the professions holding an advanced 
degree. Although the Director found substantial merit in the proposed endeavor in the field of public 
relations, the Director concluded that the record does not establish that the Beneficiary's endeavor has 
national importance. The Director also concluded the record did not satisfy the second and third 
Dhanasar prongs. For the reasons discussed below, the Petitioner has not established that a waiver of 
the requirement of a job offer is warranted. 
The Petitioner initially described the endeavor as a plan "to continue using my expertise and 
knowledge in [ c ]ommunications." The Petitioner also provided a bullet-point list of what he asserts 
the endeavor would accomplish, as follows: 
• U.S. job creation; 
• Preparing future US [p ]ublic [r ]elations specialists; 
• Managing the image of US companies from a public relations standpoint; 
• Adding to the U.S. GDP; 
• Increasing visibility of companies' brands; 
• Improving brand awareness and recognition; 
• Building authority and credibility in the market, generating business opportunities; 
• Positioning a company as an expert in the industry; and 
• Helping to prepare US companies to deal with international competition. 
The Petitioner also stated, "I can share my experience with students through teaching, helping to 
prepare future U.S. public relations and corporate communications leaders." In response to the 
Director's request for evidence (RFE), the Petitioner reiterated the proposed endeavor as follows: 
[M]y overall proposed endeavor in the United States is to offer my expertise in public 
relations and communications, including risk and crisis communications, to American 
companies. I will do this by prospecting employment to support public relations and 
communications operations of American companies, which will lead to economic 
growth and development in the U.S. Additionally, I will contribute my 
communications and public relations knowledge to the development of U.S. public 
relations professionals and students, by working as a [ c ]ommunications [p ]rofessor at 
the [ u ]ndergraduate [l]evel. 
In the decision, the Director concluded the record does not establish that the proposed endeavor has 
national importance, observing that "the [P]etitioner has not shown that his proposed endeavor in this 
case stands to sufficiently extend beyond an employer or students to impact the industry more broadly. 
Nor has the [P]etitioner shown the [P]etitioner's particular proposed endeavor may have broader 
implications in the public relations or communications fields." The Director farther observed that "the 
2 See Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 888-91, for elaboration on these three prongs. 
3 
[P]etitioner's claims of the potential prospective impact on the broader field have not been 
corroborated with independent objective evidence." 
On appeal, the Petitioner summarizes his expertise in public relations and his prior career 
accomplishments in Brazil. The Petitioner also asserts that he "has been working in the U.S. at two 
educational institutions, University oti land I !university ... teaching university courses 
in communication, as well as conducting research in crisis communications." The Petitioner also 
states that he "has begun pursuing his Ph.D. in [s]trategic [c]ommunications." The Petitioner asserts 
that his ability to speak Portuguese, Spanish, and English "can appeal to numerous foreign entities ... 
to gamer international attention and appreciation for U.S. market offerings[, which] is of particular 
national importance, especially in the modem business sphere, where globalization is leading to a rise 
of worldly professionals who can promote business and economic opportunities in key regions across 
the world." The Petitioner also discusses the field of public relations in general. 
In determining national importance, the relevant question is not the importance of the industry, field, 
or profession in which an individual will work; instead, to assess national importance, we focus on the 
"specific endeavor that the foreign national proposes to undertake." See Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 
889. Dhanasar provided examples of endeavors that may have national importance, as required by 
the first prong, having "national or even global implications within a particular field, such as those 
resulting from certain improved manufacturing processes or medical advances" and endeavors that 
have broader implications, such as "significant potential to employ U.S. workers or has other 
substantial positive economic effects, particularly in an economically depressed area." Id. at 889-90. 
The proposed endeavor of teaching communication courses benefits the courses' students; however, 
the record does not establish how the endeavor would have broader implications in terms of significant 
potential to employ U.S. workers or have substantial positive economic effects, beyond the Petitioner's 
employing universities, as contemplated by the first Dhanasar prong. See Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 
889. Petitioners bear the burden of articulating how they satisfy eligibility criteria. See section 291 
of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361. Similarly, the record does not establish how the proposed endeavor of 
working as a public communications specialist for one or more unspecified companies rises to the 
level of broader implications within the field, as contemplated by Dhanasar. See Dhanasar, 26 I&N 
Dec. at 889. Although the Petitioner's statements on appeal regarding his expertise and prior career 
accomplishments in Brazil address aspects of the second Dhanasar prong, they do not address how 
the proposed endeavor in the United States has broader implications beyond his immediate 
employer(s) and students, as required by the first Dhanasar prong. See id. Moreover, the Petitioner's 
focus on appeal on the field of public relations in general does not address aspects of the specific 
endeavor and how the performance of the planned activities under the endeavor would have broader 
implications, rising to the level of national importance as contemplated by Dhanasar. See id. 
In summation, the Petitioner has not established that the proposed endeavor has national importance, 
as required by the first Dhanasar prong, and therefore is not eligible for a national interest waiver. 
We reserve our opinion regarding whether the record satisfies the second or third Dhanasar prong. 
4 
III. CONCLUSION 
As the Petitioner has not met the requisite first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework, we 
conclude that the Petitioner has not established eligibility for, or otherwise merits, a national interest 
waiver as a matter of discretion. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
5