dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Reinsurance

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: JAN. 4, 2024 In Re: 28424853 
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 a member of the professions 
holding an advanced degree or as an individual of exceptional ability, 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 the Petitioner had not 
established a waiver of the required job offer, and thus of the labor certification, would 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 I&N Dec. 369, 375-76 (AAO 2010). We review the questions in this matter 
de novo. Matter of Christa's , Inc., 26 I&N Dec. 537,537 n.2 (AAO 2015). Upon de novo review, 
we will dismiss the appeal. 
I. LAW 
To establish eligibility for a national interest waiver, petitioners must demonstrate qualification for the 
underlying EB-2 visa classification, as either an advanced degree professional or as an individual of 
exceptional ability in the sciences, arts, or business. Section 203(b )(2)(B)(i) of the Act. In addition, 
petitioners must show the merit of a discretionary waiver of the job offer requirement "in the national 
interest." Section 203(b )(2)(B)(i) of the Act. Matter ofDhanasar, 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 proposed endeavor has both substantial merit and national importance; 
• The individual is well-positioned to advance their proposed endeavor; and 
• On balance, waiving the job offer requirement would benefit the United States. 
1 See also Poursina v. USCIS, 936 F.3d 868 (9th Cir. 2019) (finding USCIS' decision to grant or deny a national interest 
waiver to be discretionary in nature). 
II. ANALYSIS 
Regarding the national interest waiver, the first prong relates to substantial merit and national importance 
of the specific proposed endeavor. Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. The Petitioner's initial cover letter 
indicated: 
. . . [The Petitioner] will help create new employment opportunities through his company 
[E-R-], therefore, thus, protecting his contributions to the company will certainly create 
employment for American citizens and residents, thus, protecting their economic interests 
and promoting President Trump's [Buy American Hire American] policy .... 
. . . [E-R-] will be created as a reinsurance broker which will link the Colombian, Chilean 
and Peruvian markets with the U.S. underwriter market, providing tailored solutions for 
their mutual needs. To achieve this principle objective, [E-R-] would employ the best IT 
solutions available in the market, capitalize on elite insurance hubs, especially from the 
United States and create a fertile environment of creative proposals for its clients. The 
presence of [the Petitioner] as the Chief Executive Officer, well known for his abilities to 
solve complex problems and his exclusive business contacts-circle developed through his 
many years of experience, is a sine qua non condition to assure the Company's success. 
In response to the Director's request for evidence (RFE), the Petitioner submitted a "Personal Statement" 
reflecting: 
[A] significant current challenge of the reinsurance industry is the shortage of experts 
trained in this area which represent only 1 % of all insurance professionals in the United 
States. The reinsurance area demands extensive preparation in the academic and on the 
job. Looking back on my career, I can understand the critical variables that make up the 
profile of a comprehensive reinsurance professional. It is my professional commitment 
to contribute my knowledge and experience to educate and train new experts, not only 
through the job but also provide free training through the [E-R-] website for the public, 
recorded webinars freely available on social networks, and presentations on current and 
specific topics of reinsurance in educational centers. 
. . . The project [E-R-] aims to reach ten full-time equivalent jobs in the first five years 
and contributes with ongoing $150 thousand in federal taxes by year as part of the 
expansion plan and the efficient operation. My project is a way to expand the United 
States reinsurance business to other markets where I already know and, in this line, 
contribute to reinforcing the reinsurance industry in the United States for the benefit of its 
professionals, local and global corporations, and communities. 
The Director found the Petitioner established the proposed endeavor's substantial merit but not its national 
importance. Regarding substantial merit, the endeavor's merits may be demonstrated in a range of 
2 
areas such as business, entrepreneurialism, science, technology, culture, health, or education. 
Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. On appeal, the Petitioner maintains the national importance of his 
proposed endeavor. 
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 specific endeavor that the 
foreign national proposes to undertake." See Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. However, the Petitioner 
repeatedly emphasized the national importance of his field rather than the national importance of his 
proposed endeavor of owning and operating E-R-. For instance, the Petitioner's initial cover letter 
made arguments relating to "[the Petitioner's] field has national or even global implications," "[the 
Petitioner's] field has significant potential to employ U.S. workers or has other substantial positive 
economic effects," "[the Petitioner's] Field will Broadly Enhance Societal welfare," and "[the 
Petitioner's] Field impacts a matter that a government entity has described as having national 
importance or is the subject of national initiatives." Similarly, the Petitioner provided evidence 
regarding various topics, such as the global reinsurance market, COVID-19 and insurance, public 
policy and life insurance, the insurance industry, insurance regulation, cybersecurity, infrastructure 
investment, insurance investments, natural disaster insurance, insurance health coverage, and other 
range of topics. Again, the Petitioner must demonstrate the national importance of his specific, 
proposed endeavor of E-R- rather than the importance of insurance, government initiatives, or the 
industry or field. 2 In Dhanasar, we 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. We note here the alleged shortage of an occupation does not render a 
proposed endeavor nationally important under the Dhanasar framework. In fact, such shortages of 
qualified workers are directly addressed by the U.S. Department of Labor through the labor 
certification process. 
In addition, the Petitioner highlighted his experience, skills, and knowledge, including his "advanced 
degree in Mechanical Engineering (STEM [science, technology, engineering, and mathematics] 
field)." The Petitioner's experience and abilities in his field 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 he proposes to undertake has national importance 
under Dhanasar's first prong. 
Moreover, 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. The 
Petitioner did not offer specific information and evidence to corroborate his assertions that the 
prospective impact of working as a reinsurance broker or providing reinsurance brokerage services 
through E-R- rises to the level of national importance. In Dhanasar, we determined 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, the record does not show through supporting 
2 The Petitioner's arguments and evidence relate more to the substantial merit of the proposed endeavor rather than the 
national importance part. 
3 
documentation how his specific services with E-R- stand to sufficiently extend beyond his prospective 
clients, to impact the industry or the U.S. economy more broadly at a level commensurate with national 
importance. 
Finally, although the Petitioner provided a business plan, the Petitioner did not demonstrate how his 
business' claimed revenue and employment projections, even if credible or plausible, have significant 
potential to employ U.S. workers or otherwise offers substantial positive economic effects for our 
nation. While the revenue forecasts $1.4M in year 1 to $2.5M in year 5, the business plan does not 
establish the benefits to the regional or national economy would reach the level of "substantial positive 
economic effects" as contemplated by Dhanasar. Id. at 890. Similarly, although the plan claims the 
business would create 7 positions in year 1 to 10 positions in year 5, the Petitioner did not show that 
such future staffing levels would provide substantial economic benefits to I I, Florida or the region 
or U.S. economy more broadly at a level commensurate with national importance. The Petitioner, for 
instance, did not demonstrate that such employment figures would utilize a significant population of 
workers in the area or would substantially impact job creation and economic growth, either regionally 
or nationally. For all these reasons, the record does not establish that, beyond the limited benefits 
provided to its prospective clients and employees, the Petitioner's proposed endeavor has broader 
implications rising to the level of having national importance or that it would offer substantial positive 
economic effects. 
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. 3 
III. CONCLUSION 
As the Petitioner has not met the 
requisite first prong ofthe Dhanasar analytical framework, we conclude 
he has not demonstrated eligibility 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. 
3 See INS v. Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. 24, 25 (1976) (stating that agencies are not required to make "purely advisory findings" 
on issues that are unnecessary to the ultimate decision); see also Matter ofL-A-C-, 26 l&N Dec. 516,526 n.7 (BIA 2015) 
( declining to reach alternate issues on appeal where applicants do not otherwise meet their burden of proof). 
4