dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Religion

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: WL. 06, 2023 In Re: 25672784 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, a priest, seeks classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree 
or of exceptional ability, Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 203(b)(2), 8 U.S.C. 
§ 1153(b )(2). The Petitioner also seeks a national interest waiver of the job offer requirement that is 
attached to this employment based second preference (EB-2) classification. See section 
203(b )(2)(B)(i) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b )(2)(B)(i). U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services 
(USCIS) may grant this discretionary waiver of the required job offer, and thus of a labor certification, 
when it is in the national interest to do so. See 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). 
The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the petition, concluding the Petitioner misrepresented 
materials facts, 1 and so the record did not establish that 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 l&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, 
and because the evidence in the record does not demonstrate the Petitioner's eligibility for a waiver of 
the job offer requirement and thus the labor certification under the analytical framework we first 
explicated in the precedent decision Matter of Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. 884 (AAO 2016), we will 
dismiss their appeal. 
1 The record indicates the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the USA defrocked the Petitioner, removed them from their list 
of clergy, and revoked their authorization to celebrate liturgical services and holy mysteries of the church. Since the 
Petitioner represented themselves as a priest after the date of his apparent defrocking , the Director entered a finding of 
willful misrepresentation . The Petitioner states on appeal that they were unaware they had been defrocked. So the record 
as presently constituted contains an unresolved conflict of fact that does not support the Director's finding of willful 
misrepresentation and we hereby withdraw it. Nevertheless , the apparent timing of the Petitioner 's representations in this 
matter reflected that a reasonable question of fact existed about whether the Petitioner misrepresented themselves. In other 
words, we withdraw the Director 's finding not because we find there was not willful misrepresentation , but because the 
record as it currently exists is not sufficiently developed to support it. The Petitioner should be prepared to address the 
veracity of their representations in this or any future immigration proceedings . 
I. LAW 
Whilst neither the statute nor the pertinent regulations define the term "national interest," we set forth 
a three-prong analytical framework for adjudicating national interest waiver petitions in Dhanasar. 
Dhanasar states that USCIS may as a matter of discretion grant a national interest waiver of the job 
offer, and thus of the labor certification, to a petitioner classified in the EB-2 category if they 
demonstrate that (1) the noncitizen's proposed endeavor has both substantial merit and national 
importance, (2) the noncitizen 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 
noncitizen 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 noncitizen. To determine whether 
the noncitizen 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, progress towards achieving the proposed endeavor, and 
the interest of potential customers, users, investors, or other relevant entities or individuals are also 
key considerations. 
The third prong requires the petitioner to demonstrate that, on balance of applicable factors, it would 
be beneficial to the United States to waive the requirements of a job offer and thus of a labor 
certification. USCIS may evaluate factors such as whether, in light of the nature of the noncitizen' s 
qualification or the proposed endeavor, it would be impractical either for the noncitizen to secure a 
job offer or for the petition to obtain a labor certification; whether, even assuming that other qualified 
U.S. workers are available, the United States would still benefit from the noncitizen's contributions; 
and whether the national interest in the noncitizen's contributions is sufficiently urgent to warrant 
forgoing the labor certification process. Each of the factors 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. 
II. ANALYSIS 
The Petitioner accompanied their national interest waiver petition with a copy of their master's degree 
in theology with addendum, an identity document issued by the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the 
USA identifying the Petitioner as a priest until October 31, 2021, publicly available information about 
the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the USA, their resume, and several letters and certificates 
corresponding to the Petitioner's services and qualifications as a priest. The Director issued a request 
for additional evidence (RFE) so that the Petitioner could supplement the record with any 
documentation or information to demonstrate their eligibility under the Dhanasar analytical 
framework. The Petitioner submitted an expert opinion from I I professor of 
sociology at the University! Ia personal statement, an educational evaluation, and several 
2 
reference letters in support in response to the RFE in hopes of demonstrating their eligibility under the 
Dhanasar analytical framework. 
The record as presently constituted supports the Petitioner's categorization as an advanced degree 
professional for EB-2 classification. And an endeavor's merit may be demonstrated in a range of areas 
such as business, entrepreneurialism, science, technology, culture, health, or education. The Director 
concluded that the Petitioner's endeavor was substantially meritorious, and the record supports that 
conclusion. So the sole issue to be addressed is whether the Petitioner has established that a waiver 
of the job offer requirement, and thus of the labor certification, would be in the national interest. For 
the reasons discussed below we conclude that the Petitioner has not sufficiently demonstrated the 
national importance of their proposed endeavor. 
The Petitioner endeavors to serve as a priest. The Petitioner's personal statement submitted in 
response to the RFE elaborated on their endeavor and indicated that they intended to continue to serve 
as a priest at the Ukrainian Orthodox Church ofl IConnecticut. 
The Petitioner proposed to endeavor to provide the church community with "ongoing spiritual care" 
by offering "emotional and spiritual support" ostensibly rooted in the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of 
which they represented themselves to be clergy. 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 "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. 
The evidence in the record does not support this endeavor's national importance. The record does not 
sufficiently describe how ministering to the spiritual needs of Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the USA 
adherents in Connecticut would have broader national or global implications rising to a level of 
national importance. 3 And the record does not demonstrate any prospective substantial positive 
economic effects from the proposed endeavor for the United States or in the United States interest. 
A good portion of the arguments the Petitioner makes in support of their proposed endeavor stem from 
the effect of the Ukrainian invasion crisis. The Petitioner filed their petition on January 25, 2021. The 
2 We focus on the proposed endeavor when analyzing eligibility under Dhanasar's first prong. Dhanasar at 889. And 
because we have concluded that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor does not rise to a level of national importance, the 
validity of the Petitioner's status as a priest of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the USA is not pertinent. Their status as 
an authorized priest is germane to an analysis of their ability to advance their proposed endeavor under the second prong 
of the Dhanasar analytical framework to which we are not required to provide a conclusion at this time. 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"). 
3 Much of the documentation the Petitioner has submitted focuses on their individual accomplishments and expe1iise when 
attesting to the national importance and substantial merit of the proposed endeavor. It is important to note that the 
Petitioner's accomplishments and expertise are more relevant to the second prong of Dhanasar, which "shifts the focus 
from the proposed endeavor to the foreign national." Dhanasar at 889. 
3 
Ukrainian invasion crisis did not commence until February 24, 2022, nearly 13 months later. As there 
was no advance warning or expectation for the elapsed period of 13 months between when the 
Petitioner filed their petition and when the Ukrainian invasion crisis commenced, the need for the 
Petitioner's endeavor to help wounded Ukrainian soldiers and war refugees could not have been 
anticipated. So we view the Petitioner's expression of their proposed endeavor's contours in their 
response to the RFE with a considerable degree of skepticism. A petitioner must establish eligibility 
for the benefit they are seeking at the time the petition is filed. See Matter ofKatigbak, 14 r&N Dec. 
45, 49 (Reg'l Comm'r 1971). A petitioner may not make material changes to a petition in an effort to 
make a deficient petition conform to users requirements. See Matter ofIzummi, 22 r&N Dec. 169, 
176 (Assoc Comm'r 1998). Questions of credibility can severely undermine the assertions contained 
in a petition and the reliability of the evidence submitted in support. See Matter ofHo, 19 r&N Dec. 
582 at 591 ("Doubt cast on any aspect of the petitioner's proof may lead to a reevaluation of the 
reliability and sufficiency of the remaining evidence offered in support of the visa petition"). 
Moreover, the Petitioner has not provided sufficient evidence of the effect of the Ukrainian invasion 
crisis on their congregation. And the evidence does not describe the existence of any Ukrainian war 
refugees or soldiers seeking the Petitioner's services through their endeavor. And even ifthere were 
such individuals or could be in the future, the evidence does not describe how tending to the spiritual 
needs of wounded Ukrainian soldiers and refugees could rise to a level of national importance any 
more than tending to the religious needs of other members of the laity. 
The expert opinion submitted by the Petitioner does not illuminate how the Petitioner's proposed 
endeavor rises to a level of national importance. users may, in its discretion, use as advisory opinion 
statement from universities, professional organization, or other sources submitted in evidence as 
expert testimony. See Matter of Caron Int'!, 19 r&N Dec. 791, 795 (Comm'r. 1988). However, the 
submission of letters from experts supporting the petition is not presumptive evidence of eligibility. 
Id. Moreover, when letters are submitted to support the merits of an entrepreneur's business, business 
plan, product or technology, the letters should be from relevant third-party reviewers such as 
prospective investors, retailers, or other industry experts. The expert opinion's author is a professor 
of sociology, which does not appear related to the Petitioner's theological, religious, or spiritual field 
of endeavor. The writer's areas of academic interest are sociology, criminology, deviance, gender, 
and sexualities. They noted their "expertise in assessment of dossiers for foll professor promotions" 
and services as a "diversity consultant." But it is unclear from the record how this qualified them to 
render an opinion on the national importance of the Petitioner's proposed endeavor to minister to the 
spiritual needs of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the USA's adherents inl IConnecticut. 
The writer's letter identified several diverse areas that the Petitioner's endeavor could potentially 
benefit, including addressing a clergy shortage,4 improving mental health, "substantial positive 
economic effects," COVrD-19 recovery, reducing systemic racism, increasing upward opportunity 
and mobility for vulnerable communities, advancing international development and global 
humanitarian work, strengthening pluralism and respecting constitutional guarantees, benefitting 
childhood education, promoting health, and stabilizing family relationships. 
4 The national interest waiver is not designed to address labor shortages. Moreover, a streamlined process allows non­
profit religious organizations, or their affiliates, to employ noncitizens as ministers, in religious vocations, or in other 
religious occupations in the United States in the employment based fourth preference immigrant classification. 
Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 203(6)(4), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(4). The impracticality of other 
immigration options designed to address labor shortages, like the labor certification process, are evaluated under the third 
prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework. 
4 
I 
In essence, the writer attempted to draw a correlation between the beneficial influences of spirituality 
on a wide swath of important issues and scourges for humanity, such as improved mental health and 
reduced racism. But the wide-ranging potential "benefits" identified by the writer diluted the 
Petitioner's proposed endeavor because they did not correlate to the Petitioner's proposed endeavor to 
minister to the spiritual needs of Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the USA adherents inI 
Connecticut rooted in the Ukrainian Orthodox religion followed by the Petitioner. 
At the outset, the writer spoke of religion and spirituality interchangeably when they are not. The 
writer's own cited source material published in Frontiers in Psychology distinguishes spirituality "as 
a more general, unstructured, personalized, and naturally occurring phenomenon, where a person seeks 
closeness and/or connectedness between him/herself and a higher power or purpose." But the religion 
within which the Petitioner's proposed endeavor is rooted and is intrinsically tied, Ukrainian Orthodox 
Christianity, is not "general, unstructured, personalized and naturally occurring." It is a specific, 
structured, rules-driven, and well-developed construct. 
For example, the writer discussed the importance of spiritual work and its benefits to mental health. 
But the record was devoid of any evidence showing how the improvement of mental health in a 
discrete population such as Ukrainian war refugees and wounded Ukrainian soldiers amongst the 
common Ukrainian laity inl IConnecticut rooted in spirituality implicated broader issues 
and concerns rising to a level of national importance. In fact, the writer only spoke of the link between 
spirituality and mental health in general terms. The writer's assertions sourced in a summary study 
exploring the link between spirituality and mental health and well-being provided no meaningful 
analysis of the broader implications or the potential prospective economic impact of the proposed 
endeavor rising to the level of national importance. 
And when the writer did write about religion, they opined about religion's influence on education, 
health, family relationships in the abstract and general. They named no specific religion, or any 
specific religious work, that correlated to the specific work the Petitioner endeavored to accomplish. 
The writer's analysis was ineffective as a result. The writer's opinion did not demonstrate the broader 
implications of the Petitioner's priestly work and how their specific religious work, not just religion 
in general, influenced education, health, and family relationship on a level of national importance. 
And the "substantial positive economic effects" the writer sought to attribute to the Petitioner's 
proposed endeavor were indistinct. The writer appeared to characterize the various religious groups 
in the United States which could be housed in churches, synagogues, mosques, temples, and chapels 
(ostensibly corresponding to faiths such as Christianity, Judaism, Islam, etc.) as a loosely connected 
group influencing the economy by patronizing retail establishments, establishing educational 
institutions, and promoting religious dietary restrictions so that restaurants make food items that 
comply available at their establishments. In the first instance, the record does not sufficiently support 
the specific connection between religious people and economic activity. Even irreligious people 
would buy goods and services (retail), go to elementary, secondary, and higher educational institutions 
(education), and adhere to dietary restrictions (gluten free, lacto/ovo vegetarianism, keto) when they 
go to eating establishments. Moreover, the writer has not explained in their opinion how religious 
people who engaged in financial transactions to avail themselves of these day to day needs 
substantially provided greater positive economic effects than when the irreligious laity engaged in the 
5 
same act1v1t1es. The record did not reflect how the economic activities of religious people would have 
prompted job growth anywhere let alone in economically distressed areas. But the key deficiency in 
the writer's statements is that it neglected to analyze the Petitioner's proposed endeavor's impact. The 
Petitioner's endeavor, such that it is, is not a multi-faith enterprise. It is a plan to function as a priest 
in the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the USA and tend to their congregation. The record does not 
contain sufficient evidence reflecting a substantial positive economic effect stemming from the 
Petitioner's specific endeavor and how it rose to a level of national importance. 
And the writer devotes a section of their opinion to summarizing a White House initiative to partner 
with faith-based and neighborhood organizations to address pandemic recovery, address economic 
recovery, fight racism, increase opportunities of the underrepresented and disadvantaged, advance 
pluralism, advance international development and global humanitarian work, and respect 
constitutional guarantees. The existence of the White House initiative bestows no benefit or demerit 
to the Petitioner's proposed endeavor. This White House initiative is the White House's endeavor, 
not the Petitioner's. There is no evidence in the record which connects the Petitioner's endeavor to 
the White House initiative. The Petitioner is not involved with the White House initiative. The White 
House initiative is secular; it is not limited to any one religion. And the aim of the White House 
initiative is not correspondent to the Petitioner's goal to minister to the spiritual needs of Ukrainian 
Orthodox Church of the USA adherents inl lConnecticut. 
As the record does not support the broader implications of the Petitioner's endeavor or any positive 
economic effects rising to a level of national importance, we can only conclude that they have not 
demonstrated eligibility for a national interest waiver under the first prong of the Dhanasar 
framework. 
III. CONCLUSION 
As the Petitioner has not met the requisite first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework, we 
conclude that they do not merit a favorable exercise of discretion to waive the requirement of a job 
offer, and therefore a labor certification. And we reserve the issue of whether the Petitioner 
demonstrated eligibility under the remaining prongs of the Dhanasar analytical framework. See INS 
v Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. at 25 and Matter of L-A-C-, 26 I&N Dec. at 526 n.7. So we dismiss the 
Petitioner's appeal. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
6