dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Religious Services

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 17977880 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: AUG. 19, 2021 
Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker (Advanced Degree, Exceptional Ability, National 
Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner , a youth minister, 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 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 that she is eligible 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. 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. 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. 
Furthermore, 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 impmiance, 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 off er 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 
1 In announcing this new framework, we vacated our prior precedent decision, Matter of New York State Department of 
Transportation, 22 I&NDec. 215 (Act. Assoc. Comm'r 1998) (NYSDOT). 
2 See also Poursina v. USCJS, No. 1 7-16579, 2019 WL 4051593 (Aug. 28, 2019) (finding USC IS' decision to grant or 
deny a nationalinterestwaiverto be discretionaiy in nature). 
2 
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 
A. Member of the Professions Holding an Advanced Degree 
The Director did not make a determination regarding the Petitioner's eligiblity as a member of the 
professions holding an advanced degree. The record reflects that the Petitioner possesses the foreign 
equivalent of an advanced degree. Accordingly, the Petitioner qualifies as a memberofthe professions 
holding an advanced degree. See 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2) and (3)(i)(A). 
B. National Interest Waiver 
The remaining issue to be determined is whether the Petitioner has established that a waiver of the 
requirement of a job offer, and thus a labor certification, would be in the national interest. For the 
reasons discussed below, we agree with the Director that the Petitioner has not sufficiently 
demonstrated eligibility under the Dhanasar analytical framework. 
The first prong relates to substantial merit and national importance of the specific proposed endeavor. 
Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. The Petitioner initially provided a "Statement of Purpose and Plan" 
indicating that she intends "[tlo assist in reorganizing the structure of the Youth Wing of the~ 
I I located inl !Maryland] in order to foster paiiicipation and 
encourage them to make informed decisions regarding lifestyle changes and choices that can improve 
quality oflife and good health." In addition, she listed various plans such as: "[t]o draw up programs 
and enforce strategies that regulate beneficial moral and health behaviors among the youths," "[ t]o cany 
out research and develop study materials that will be used to prepare messages and instructions in the 
Youth Department," and "[t]o organize prayer walks by arranging with the Senior Pastor to incorporate 
health messages into the sermons." 
In response to the Director's request for evidence (RFE), the Petitioner updated her proposed endeavor 
and claimed: 
My role as a Youth Outreach Minister, will focus primarily on youths and young adults 
of immigrant families across the United States, especially those coming from Nigeria and 
West Africa states. These families and young adults are especially susceptible to Islamic 
radicalization and potentially being recruited to United States based terror cells which is 
clearly against the national interest. 
... As Youth Outreach Minister, I will be organizing outreach activities and organizing 
support groups to help influence Muslim and non-Muslim youths in the United States. 
3 SccDhanasar, 26l&NDec. at 888-91, for elaboration onthesethreeprongs. 
3 
Just like in N orthem Nigeria, I also intend to leverage my formal education in my role as 
Youth Outreach Minister to make an impact in the current fight against epidemic of 
opioids abuse . 
. . . As a Youth Outreach Minister who is versatile in the area of cultural competence, in 
addition to my public health knowledge, and as someone that has tremendous passion to 
help the youths develop good mindset together with my vast expe1ience in working with 
youths of different cultural background, I am of the advantage to help our youths to shun 
those social vices which will help them make healthy decisions. This type of service has 
national importance because no nation wants majority of its population to be diagnosed 
with mental ill health. 
The Petitioner maintains on appeal: 
[She] is a licensed Medical Laboratory Scientist. She has been ab leto effectively combine 
her academic training, life and wolk experience so as to be very beneficial in the United 
States. Her letters of recommendation from her present and past employers is an 
attestation to the fact that she is able and willing to take on the duties required as a You1h 
Outreach Minister. 
The Director determined that the Petitioner demonstrated the substantial merit of her proposed endeavor, 
and the record supports that conclusion. For the reasons discussed below, we agree with the Director that 
the Petitioner has not sufficiently shown the national importance of her 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 "the specific endeavor that the 
foreign national proposes to undertake." See Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. Here, the Petitioner 
must demonstrate the national importance ofherproviding specific youth outreach ministerial services 
rather than the national importance of youth outreach, youth ministerial services, or other social or 
religious industries in which she intends to work. 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 impmiance." Id. at 890. 
As indicated above, the Petitioner's emphasizes her "academic training, life and work experience" on 
appeal. However, the Petitioner's experience, skills, and abilities in her 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 that she proposes to undertake has national 
importance under Dhanasar' s first prong. 
4 
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 did 
not point, either at the time of filing or in the RFE response, to which evidence demonstrates 1he 
national imp01iance aspect of her proposed endeavor. On appeal, the Petitioner provides previously 
submitted documentation, as well as n
1
ewly ol f ered evidence, such as a "Youth Ministry Handbook" 
from] I registration form for an course taught by the Petitioner, and recommendation 
letters. However, we will not consider this evidence for the first time on appeal as it was not presented 
before the Director. See Matter of Soriano, 19 I&N Dec. 764, 766 (BIA 1988)(providing that if "the 
petitioner was put on notice of the required evidence and given a reasonable opportunity to provide it 
for the record before the denial, we will not consider evidence submitted on appeal for any purpose" 
and that "we will adjudicate the appeal based on the record of proceedings" before the Chief); see also 
Matter of Obaigbena, 19 I&N Dec. 533 (BIA 1988). Regardless, the evidence does not show that 1he 
Petitionr's prlposed endeavor of providing youth outreach services stands to sufficiently extend 
beyond to impact the field or the U.S. economy more broadly at a level commensurate wi1h 
national importance. 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. 
Furthermore, the Petitioner has not established that the specific endeavor she proposes to undertake 
has significant potential to employ U.S. workers or otherwise offers substantial positive economic 
effects for our nation. Without sufficient information or evidence regarding any projected U.S. economic 
impact or job creation attributable to her future work, the record does not show that benefits to the U.S. 
regional or national economy resulting from the Petitioner's youth ministerial services would reach the 
level of "substantial positive economic effects" contemplated by Dhanasar. Id. at 890. Accordingly, 
the Petitioner's proposed endeavor does not meet the first prong of the Dhanasar framework. 
Because the documentation in the record does not establish the national importance of her 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 her eligibility under the second 
and third prongs outlined in Dhanasar, therefore, would serve no meaningful purpose. 
III. CONCLUSION 
As the Petitioner has not met the requisite first prong oftheDhanasar analytical framewmk, we conclude 
that she has not demonstrated that she 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, with each considered 
as an independent and alternate basis for the decision. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
5