dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Science Education

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
MATTER OF M-0-A-R-
APPEAL OF TEXAS SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: SEPT. 7, 2016 
PETITION: FORM I -140, IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER 
The Petitioner, a high school chemistry teacher, seeks classification as a member of the professions 
holding an advanced degree. See section 203(b)(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 
U.S.C. § 1153(b)(2). In addition, the Petitioner seeks a national interest waiver of the job offer 
requirement that is normally attached to this classification. See section 203(b)(2)(B)(i) of the Act, 
8 U.S.C. §1153(b)(2)(B)(i). This discretionary waiver allows U.S. Citizenship and Immigration 
Services (USCIS) to provide an exemption from the requirement of a job offer, and thus a labor 
certification, when it serves the national interest to do so. 
The Director, Texas Service Center, denied the petition, concluding that the Petitioner did not 
/ 
establish that her work will be national in scope or that she will benefit the national interest to a 
greater extent than an available U.S. worker with the same qualifications. 
The matter is now before us on appeal. The Petitioner contends that her case should be approved to 
further President Obama's goals in the fields of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics 
(STEM). 
Upon de novo review, we will dismiss the appeal. 
I. LAW 
To establish eligibility for a national int11rest waiver, a petitioner must first demonstrate qualification for 
the underlying visa classification, as either an advanced degree professional or an individual of 
exceptional ability in the sciences, arts, or business. Because this classification normally 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 states, in pertinent part: 
(2) Aliens Who Are Members of the Professions Holding Advanced Degrees or Aliens 
of Exceptional Ability.-
Matter of M-G-A-R-
(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) ... the 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 sen;ices in the sciences, arts, professions, or business be sought by an 
/employer in the United States.[1] 
Neither the statute nor the pertinent regulations define the term "national interest." Additionally, 
Congress did not provide a specific definition of "in the national interest." The Committee on the 
Judiciary merely noted in its report to the Senate that the committee had "focused on national interest by 
increasing the number and proportion of visas for immigrants who would benefit the United States 
economically and otherwise .... " S. Rep. No. 55, lOlst Cong., 1st Sess., 11 (1989). 
A supplementary notice regarding the regulations implementing the Immigration Act of 1990, P.L. 
101-649, 104 Stat. 4978'(Nov. 29, 1990) (IMMACT90), published at 56 Fed. Reg. 60897,60900 (Nov. 
29, 1991 ), states, in pertinent part: 
The Service !believes it appropriate to leave the application of this test as flexible as 
possible, although clearly an alien seeking to meet the [national inte'rest] standard must 
make a showing significantly above that necessary to prove the "prospective national 
benefit" [required of aliens seeking to qualify as "exceptional."] The burden will rest 
with the alien to establish that exemption from, or waiver of, the job offer will be in the 
national interest. Each case is to \Je judged on its own merits. 
Matter of New York State Dep't ofTransp., 22 I&N Dec. 215,217-18 (Act. Assoc. Comm'r 1998) 
(NYSDOT), set forth several factors which must be considered when evaluating a request for a national 
interest waiver. First, a petitioner must demonstrate that he or she seeks employment in an area of 
substantial intrinsic merit. Id at 217. Next, a petitioner must show that the proposed benefit will be 
national in scope. Id Finally, the petitioner seeking the waiver must establish that he or she will serve 
1 Pursuant to section 1517 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 ("HSA"), Pub. L. No. 107-296, 116 Stat. 2135, 2311 
(codified at 6 U.S.C. § 557 (2012)), any reference to the Attorney General in a provision of the Act describing funttions 
that were transferred from the Attorney General or other Department of Justice official to the Department of Homeland 
Security by the HSA "shall be deemed to refer to the Secretary" of Homeland Security. See also 6 U.S.C. § 542 note 
(2012); 8 U.S.C. § 1551 note (2012). 
2 
(b)(6)
Matter of M-G-A-R-
the national interest to a substantially greater degree than would an available U.S. worker having the 
same minimum qualifications. Id at 217-18. 
While the national interest waiver hinges on prospective national benefit, a petitioner must demonstrate 
that his or her past record justifies projections of future benefit to the national interest. !d. at 219. A 
petitioner's assurance that he or she will, in the future, serve the national interest cannot suffice to 
establish prospective national benefit. Furthermore, eligibility for the waiver must rest with the 
petitioner's own qualifications rather than with the position sought. Assertions regarding the overall 
importance of a petitioner's area of expertise are insufficient to. show eligibility for a national 
interest waiver. !d. at 220. At issue is whether the Petitioner's contributions in the field are of such 
significance that she merits the special benefit of a national interest waiver, a benefit separate and 
distinct from the visa classification she seeks. A petitioner must demonstrate a past history of 
achievement with some degree of influence on the field as a whole. !d. at 219, n. 6. 
II. ANALYSIS 
The Petitioner has established that she is a member of the professions holding an advanced degree 
and that her work as a teacher is in an area of substantial intrin'sic merit. It remains, then, to 
determine whether the proposed benefits of the Petitioner's work will be national in scope and 
whether she will benefit the national interest to a greater extent than an available U.S. worker with 
the same minimum qualifications. 
At the time of filing the. Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker, the Petitioner was 
employed as a high school chemistry teacher for the 
Prior to that, she taught in Florida for 4 years and the Philippines for 9 years. In support of the Form 
I-140, the Petitioner submitted various documents, including copies of her academic credentials, 
training certificates, STEM-related articles, and letters from colleagues. 
Upon review of the submitted information, the Director issued a request for evidence (RFE), finding 
that the record did not establish that the Petitioner's "proposed employment is national in scope" or 
that "the national interest would be adversely affected if a labor certification were required." In 
response, the Petitioner provided additional information, including materials regarding the 
importance of national education goals with regard to STEM fields. The Director denied the petition 
finding that she had not overcome the deficiencies articulated in the RFE and concluding that she 
had not met the second and third prongs of the NYSDOT analysis. 
On appeal, the Petitioner argues that she "exerts influence well beyond her 
specific classroom or 
school" and that "the ripples extend to the county-wide school district and beyond." The brief also 
states that she: 
[P]lays a significant role in the current planning of and integration of new ideas into 
[the] science curriculum in (Maryland) to such a degree that 
the ability of President Obama' s stated mission and goals to succeed and reach its 
3 
Matter of M-G-A-R-
benchmarks for the STEM program, particularly the outreach to underserved and 
minority dominated school districts, hangs very much in the balance. 
The record does not include sufficient documentation to support such statements about the 
Petitioner's role and contributions in her school district.2 Regardless, she has not established that 
work benefitting an individual school district is national in scope. In addition, while national STEM 
initiatives address the intrinsic merit of education, they do not exempt educators from satisfying the 
NYSDOT analytical framework, and do not indicate that one teacher will have an impact at the 
national level. As USCIS does not have discretion to ignore binding precedent under 8 C.P.R. 
§ 103.3(c), the Petitioner's eligibility must be determined according ;to the framework set forth in 
NYSDOT. 
A review of the record does not reveal that the work of the Petitioner as an individual teacher 
significantly contributes to national educational goals or will further those objectives on a nationally 
significant level. The submitted documentation, including reference letters, attests to the Petitioner's 
dedication to her students and continuing professional development. Colleagues and acquaintances 
describe her as "a dynamic educator" and "a true team player" and commend her "teaching 
expertise" and "classroom management skills." However, the evidence does not indicate that the 
proposed benefits of her work will extend beyond her own students. This finding is consistent with 
NYSDOT, which cited an elementary school teacher as an example of a meritorious occupation that 
would lack the requisite national scope to establish eligibility. 
Under the third prong of the NYSDOT analysis, a petitioner must demonstrate that he or she will 
serve the national interest to a substantially greater degree than would an available U.S. worker 
having the same minimum qualifications. A petitioner must have a past record that "justifies 
projections of future benefit to the national interest" by exhibiting "some degree of influence on the 
field as a whole." !d. at 219, n. 6. The record confirms that the Petitioner is a "highly-qualified" and 
well-respected teacher with a lengthy career. The materials do not, however, establish that her work 
has or will result in significant benefits beyond her own classroom. Without evidence demonstrating 
that her work has affected the field as a whole, length of employment and employment in a 
beneficial occupation such as a teacher does not qualify the Petitioner for the national interest 
WaiVer. 
Ill. CONCLUSION 
A plain reading of the statute indicates that it was not the intent of Congress that every advanced 
degree professional or individual of exceptional ability should be exempt from the requirement of a 
job offer based on national interest. For the reasons discussed above, we find the record insufficient 
2 Statements made without supporting documentation are of limited probative value and are not sufficient for purposes of 
meeting the burden of proof in these proceedings. Matter of So./fici, 22 I&N Dec. 158, 165 (Comm'r 1998) (citing 
Matter ofTreasure Craft ofCalifornia, 14 I&N Dec. 190 (Reg'] Comm'r 1972)). 
4 
Matter of M-G-A-R-
~ 
to confirm that the scope of the Petitioner's proposed work or her past record of achievement is at a 
level sufficient to waive the job offer requirement which, by law, normally attaches to the visa 
classification sought by the Petitioner. While a petitioner need not demonstrate notoriety on the 
scale of national acclaim, the national interest waiver contemplates that his or her influence be 
national in scope. NYSDOT, 22 I&N Dec. at 217, n.3. Considering the record, the Petitioner has not 
established by a preponderance of the evidence that a waiver of the requirement of an approved labor 
certification will be in the national interest of the United States. 
We will dismiss the· appeal for the above stated reasons. In visa petition 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 ofOtiende, 26 I&N Dec. 127, 128 (BIA 2013). Here, the Petitioner 
has not met that burden. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
Cite as Matter of M-G-A-R-, ID# 77825 (AAO Sept. 7, 2016) , 
5