dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Real Estate Development

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: JUN. 28, 2024 In Re: 31659967 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner seeks second preference immigrant classification, as well as a national interest waiver 
of the job offer requirement attached to this EB-2 classification. 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 a waiver of the required 
job offer and thus of the labor certification, would not 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 l&N Dec. 369, 375-76 (AAO 2010). We review the questions in this matter 
de novo. Matter of Christo 's, Inc., 26 I&N Dec. 53 7, 537 n.2 (AAO 2015). 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. Section 203(b )(2)(B)(i) of the Act. Next, a 
petitioner must then demonstrate they merit a discretionary waiver of the job offer requirement "in the 
national interest." Section 203(b)(2)(B)(i) of the Act. Matter of Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. 884, 889 
(AAO 2016) provides that U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) may, as matter of 
discretion, 1 grant a national interest waiver if the petitioner shows: 
• The proposed endeavor bas both substantial merit and national importance; 
• The individual is well-positioned to advance the proposed endeavor; and 
• On balance, waiving the job offer requirement would benefit the United States. 
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in an unpublished decision) in concluding that USCIS' decision to grant or deny a national interest waiver to be 
discretionary in nature). 
II. ANALYSIS 
The Director determined that the Petitioner qualifies for EB-2 classification as a member of the 
professions holding an advanced degree. The sole issue before us is whether the record establishes 
that a waiver of the job offer requirement, and thus of a labor certification, would be in the national 
interest. 
The Director concluded in the denial that the Petitioner's prospective endeavor has substantial merit 
and is of national importance under Dhanasar 's first prong, but also determined that the Petitioner did 
not satisfy the second and third prongs of the Dhanasar framework. For the reasons discussed below, 
we withdraw the Director's determination that the Petitioner has established the national importance 
of her proposed endeavor. Based on our de novo review of the record, we conclude the Petitioner has 
not sufficiently demonstrated the national importance of her proposed endeavor under the first prong and 
that she is well-positioned to advance it under the second prong. While we may not discuss every 
document submitted, we have reviewed and considered each one. 
A. National Importance 
The first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework, substantial merit and national importance, 
focuses on the specific endeavor that the individual 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. Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. 
The Petitioner described her intended employment as a real estate developer in the United States, as 
follows: 
[My] proposed endeavor is to build a company dedicated to real estate development 
with an emphasis on developing energy efficient housing designs in the U.S. 
Specifically, [she] will work with the necessary actors to help develop environmentally 
friendly homes in the city ofl Ito expand the housing market and combat climate 
change. Her work will generate sufficient methods for reducing environmental impact 
while promoting infrastructure growth. 
My proposed project will have the direct benefit of reducing the environmental impact 
and make energy savings more efficient, which in the future will allow consumers to 
reduce costs of energy services and combat climate change. In this way, the residents 
ofl Iwill be able to acquire energy efficient houses, with excellent finishes that 
have air conditioning and electric infrastructure with newer and optimal technologies. 
These new technologies include the use of photovoltaic solar panels, improvement of 
the thermal insulation, use of effective ventilation systems, as well as intelligent air 
conditioning systems in the construction of houses. 
2 
In determining national importance, the relevant question is not the importance of the industry or 
profession in which the individual will work; instead, we focus on the "the specific endeavor that 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. Further, to 
evaluate whether the Petitioner's proposed endeavor satisfies the national importance requirement, we 
look to evidence documenting the "potential prospective impact" of her work. 
The Petitioner provided reports and articles in support of the petition discussing certain aspects of the 
housing market in the United States, such as the need for more affordable housing, a sustainable 
housing infrastructure, increases in private investment in real estate development, and other material 
which discuss "green building" strategies. While this documentation material provides general 
information related to the field in which the Petitioner intends to work and suggests that her endeavor 
has substantial merit it does not provide insight into her specific plan to operate a real estate 
development company or show how this endeavor would have a potential prospective impact of 
national importance. 
The Petitioner's business plan provides industry statistics regarding the growth of the "green [housing] 
market" and takes note of recent successes in the development of wind and solar energy technologies 
which provide a "clean power pipeline for "customers [who] want a house with greater performance 
that consumes less energy." However, her plan does not specifically address the means by which she 
will build or remodel homes, and how she will incorporate green energy advances into her building 
projects to a greater extent than other home builders and remodelers actively engaged in real estate 
development within her target market. 
We conclude the Petitioner has not adequately explained or demonstrated how her vaguely described 
home building and remodeling strategies differs from or improves upon those readily available and 
already in use in the United States. The business plan provides information about her proposed 
endeavor, indicating that she will invest $350,000 into her business, and will hire three employees by 
the end of her company's fifth year of operation, to include a handyman, an administrative assistant, 
and an accountant. Notably, while she projects that her firm will construct 9 homes and complete 24 
home remodeling projects by its fifth year, her plan does not call for the hiring of home construction 
personnel such as carpenters, electricians, roofers, or plumbers, either through direct hire by her 
company or on a contract basis with other construction firms. 
While the Petitioner asserts that she "will work with the necessary actors to help develop 
environmentally friendly homes in the city of I I to expand the housing market and combat 
climate change," her business plan does not sufficiently address who these "necessary actors" are, how 
she will acquire their services, and how they will incorporate "new technologies include the use of 
photovoltaic solar panels, improvement of the thermal insulation, use of effective ventilation systems, 
as well as intelligent air conditioning systems in the construction of houses." The Petitioner must 
resolve this inconsistency and ambiguity in the record with independent, objective evidence pointing 
to where the truth lies. Matter ofHo, 19 I&N Dec. 582, 591-92 (BIA 1988). 
3 
Collectively considering the evidence in the record, the Petitioner has not demonstrated that her 
proposed endeavor has significant potential to employ U.S. workers or otherwise offer substantial 
positive economic effects for the nation. Although the Petitioner claims that her company will 
positively benefit the United States by increasing housing development to address housing shortages, 
it is not clear how a business of the size and scope described in the business plan would address 
housing shortages for the number of people that would constitute an impact on a national level. Also 
unclear is how a business employing three people by its fifth year of operation would positively impact 
a given region in which either its employees or clients are located. The Petitioner has not provided 
sufficient evidence to show that she would employ a significant population of workers in a particular 
region, nor has she shown that her proposed endeavor would offer a region or its population substantial 
economic benefits through employment levels, business activity, or tax revenue. 
Further, the testimonial evidence in the record, such as the recommendation letters, do not analyze the 
proposed endeavor or offer evidence of its impact. The Petitioner's statements contain assertions that 
her work will "support[] the furtherance of U.S. environmental goals with respect to infrastructure 
development," but she provides little to no information on how her endeavor will operate on a scale 
that would significantly impact our nation's environmental goals, nor does she provide detailed 
information about how her services "are vital for improving the health and living standards of 
communities and their economic prospects through the management of energy efficient housing 
designs." The Petitioner's assertions, without evidence to substantiate them, do not establish her 
eligibility. Any basic economic activity has the potential to positively impact the economy and social 
welfare; however, the Petitioner has not offered a sufficiently direct connection between her proposed 
endeavor activities and any demonstratable societal welfare. A petitioner must support assertions with 
relevant, probative, and credible evidence. See Matter ofChawathe, 25 I&N Dec. at 376. The record 
does not contain an evidentiary basis to conclude that the effects of her specific proposed endeavor 
will rise to the level of national importance. For these reasons, the Petitioner has not met Dhanasar's 
first prong. 
B. Well Positioned to Advance the Proposed Endeavor 
We agree with the Director's ultimate conclusion that the record does not establish the Petitioner was 
well-positioned to advance the proposed endeavor under the second prong of the Dhanasar 
framework. In evaluating whether a petitioner is well positioned to advance their proposed endeavor, 
we review the following and any other relevant factors: 
• A petitioner's education, skill, knowledge, and record of success in related or similar efforts; 
• A petitioner's model or plan for future activities related to the proposed endeavor that the 
individual developed, or played a significant role in developing; 
• Any progress towards achieving the proposed endeavor; and 
• The interest or support garnered by the individual from potential customers, users, investor, or 
other relevant entities or persons. 
It is not apparent from the evidence how an individualized consideration of the multifactorial analysis 
under Dhanasar 's second prong would demonstrate that the well positioned the Petitioner is to 
advance their proposed endeavor. The record reflects that the Petitioner holds the foreign equivalent 
of a master's degree in business administration, and that she has years of experience working for a 
4 
government-controlled oil company in her home country, where she performed services largely 
focused on the procurement of "spare parts, supplies, and accessories" required for her foreign 
employer's oil drilling and refinery operations. However, the evidence provided does not persuasively 
reflect how the Petitioner's prior performance of the duties described in the experience letters is either 
a similar effort as that of their proposed endeavor (building and remodeling residential homes that 
utilize clean energy technologies) or how it constitutes a record of success in the residential real estate 
development industry. For instance, the letter from ______ (J-) states, among other things: 
The great professional performance of [the Petitioner] as Corporate Head of 
Purchasing, Contracts and Imports, allowed the maintenance programs of the refineries 
to be executed in the committed time. . . [she] has a deep knowledge of public 
contracting and business administration. Due to [her career with the oil company she 
can] work in a team and has leadership skills, skills that I consider will be very 
important tools that will allow [her] to obtain successful results in [her] project that 
[she] plans to develop in the United States. 
Notably, J- does not describe the Petitioner's specific endeavor in any detail, nor does she adequately 
explain how the Petitioner's experience at the oil company renders her well positioned to operate a 
residential real estate development company. While the letter writers appear to hold the Petitioner in 
high regard, the submitted letters do not provide sufficient information regarding the specific endeavor 
that the Petitioner will engage in or explain how her previous work experience renders her well 
positioned to pursue her proposed endeavor under Dhanasar 's second prong. 
As discussed above, the Petitioner submitted a business plan that vaguely outlines her future real estate 
development activities. For the sake of brevity, we incorporate our previously stated concerns 
regarding the plan's lack of detail and the unsupported assertions therein about how the Petitioner 
intends to build and remodel residential homes in the United States. Chawathe, supra. Importantly, 
the record does not reflect any progress to achieving the proposed endeavor. Without a sufficiently 
detailed explanation about how the Petitioner intends to operate and accomplish the core activities 
typically associated with a residential real estate development firm, the Petitioner's stated intention to 
establish her company and the letters from individuals expressing interest in investing in her company, 
when taken together, are not persuasive evidence of the endeavor's current or prospective progress. 
Id. 
A petitioner's burden of proof comprises both the initial burden of production, as well as the ultimate 
burden of persuasion. Matter ofY-B-, 21 I&N Dec. 1136, 1142 n.3 (BIA 1998); see also the definition 
of burden of proof from Black's Law Dictionary (11th ed. 2019) (reflecting the burden of proof 
includes both the burden of production and the burden of persuasion). Here, the evidence in the record 
does not sufficiently describe how well situated the Petitioner would be to advance her proposed 
endeavor. 
III. CONCLUSION 
As the Petitioner has not established that she meets the first or second prong of the Dhanasar 
framework, she is not eligible for and otherwise merits a national interest waiver. Consideration of 
the remaining Dhanasar prong would serve no legal purpose so we will reserve this issue. See INS v 
5 
Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. 24, 25 (1976) ("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 of L-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). As the Petitioner has not met the requirements of the Dhanasar analytical 
framework, we find that they have not established that they are eligible for or otherwise merit a 
national interest waiver as a matter of discretion. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
6