dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Real Estate Development

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 20635349 
Appeal of Nebraska Service Center Decision 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: JUN. 23, 2021 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker (Advanced Degree, Exceptional Ability, National 
Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, a real estate developer/entrepreneur, 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 qualifies 
for classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree, but 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 asserts eligibility 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; Matter of Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369, 375 (AAO 
2010). 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 of job 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 
1 In announcing this new framework, we vacated our prior precedent decision, Matter of New York State Department of 
Transportation, 22 I&N Dec. 215 (Act. Assoc. Comm'r 1998) (NYSDOT). 
2 See also Poursina v. USCIS, 936 F.3d 868, 2019 WL 4051593 (9th Cir. 2019) (finding USCIS' decision to grant or deny 
a national interest waiver to be discretionary in nature). 
2 
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) 
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 concluded that the Petitioner qualifies as a member of the professions holding an advanced 
degree. The Director also determined that the Petitioner had established that the proposed endeavor met 
the substantial merit portion of the first prong set forth in the Dhanasar analytical framework. However, 
for the reasons discussed below, the Petitioner has not established the national importance of his proposed 
endeavor . 
According to the Petitioner, he will continue to operate his "real estate development company that has 
established itself in the I I market as an affordable housing investment company." As 
described, his company "is a subsidiary of l which produces 3D printed 
panels out of lightweight materials, allowing homes to be assembled in just a few days times and at a 
lower material cost than traditional stick-built homes ." The company "wi ll[] expand its operations to 
include the development of new housing using this modular building technique" and "aims to provide" 
buyers with "larger homes at lower cost." 
As an initial matter, the record contains inconsistencies regarding the aforementioned 3D panels. In 
addition to the Petitioner's repeated statements thatl I "produces 3D printed panels," he also 
asserts that he "does not claim that I I produces building panels," but instead will rely on 
"a contract" through "his connections to a company inl I that produces modular housing panels 
using 3D printing tactics." 4 As the Petitioner's proposed endeavor is largely based upon the use of 
these panels in providing affordable housing, this is an important discrepancy. The Petitioner must 
resolve this inconsistency in the record with independent, objective evidence pointing to where the 
truth lies. Matter of Ho, 19 I&N Dec. 582, 591-92 (BIA 1988). 
Although the Petitioner provides information and statistics regarding such matters as the housing 
market and real estate development industry, 5 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 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 
3 See Dhanasar , 26 I&N Dec. at 888-91 , for elaboration on these three prongs. 
4 We also note the Petitioner's description of on pages 7 and 8 of the Business Plan , states that "the company's 
field of activity is development and investments in commercial real estate in but makes no mention of modular 
builds or 3D panels. We also note the Petitioner ' s description of , Ion pages 7 and 8 of the Business Plan, states 
that "the company's field of activity is development and investments in commercial real estate in but makes no 
mention of modular builds or 3D panels. 
5 While we may not discuss every piece of evidence submitted , we have reviewed and considered the record in its entirety . 
3 
"[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. 
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. While the 
Petitioner's statements reflect his intention to provide affordable housing options for his future U.S. 
buyers, 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. 
For example, although the Petitioner submitted job creation and financial projections, he provided 
little basis for such numbers. 6 The Petitioner must support his assertions with relevant, probative, and 
credible evidence. See Matter of Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369, 376 (AAO 2010). Without sufficient 
information and evidence regarding any projected U.S. economic impact or job creation directly 
attributable to his future work, the record does not show that benefits to the U.S. regional or national 
economy resulting from his affordable housing projects would reach the level of "substantial positive 
economic effects" contemplated by Dhanasar. See Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 890 .. 
In addition, the Petitioner cites to his expertise and record of success in previous projects. His 
education and past experience, however, are considerations under Dhanasar's second prong, which 
"shifts the focus from the proposed endeavor to the foreign national." Id. The issue here is whether 
the Petitioner has demonstrated the national importance of his proposed work. 
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 company and its clientele to impact the real estate development industry, the modular home 
and/or the affordable housing market, or the U.S. economy more broadly at a level commensurate with 
national importance . While providing modular and redeveloped properties at an affordable price is a 
noble business , beyond general assertions , he has not demonstrated that the particular work he 
proposes to undertake offers original innovations that contribute to advancements in his industry or 
otherwise has broader implications for his field. In addition, he has not sufficiently demonstrated that 
his specific proposed endeavor has significant potential to employ U.S. workers or otherwise offer 
substantial positive economic effects for our nation. 
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. Since this issue is dispositive of the Petitioner's 
appeal, we decline to reach and hereby reserve the appellate arguments regarding the remaining issues. 
See INS v. 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 
6 We note, for example, that according to the submitted information for Years 1 through 5, the Petitioner's net profit was 
projected to be $545,582 in Year 1 and $5,735,129 in Year 2. Not only has the Petitioner not established the basis for 
these projections, but during the Petitioner's first two years of business (from January 2018-January 2020), the business 
actually operated at a net profit loss of $1,611 . As the Petitioner did not sufficiently address this, we are left to question 
the reliability of his projections . 
4 
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). 
III. CONCLUSION 
As the Petitioner has not met the requisite first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework, we conclude 
he has not established that 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. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
5