dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Special Education

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
MATTER OF D-C-I-D-M-
APPEAL OF TEXAS SERVlCE CENTER DEClSION 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Otlice 
DATE: JULY 11, 2018 
PETITION: FORM 1-140, lMMlGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER 
The Petitioner, a special education teacher, 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). After a petitioner has established eligibility for EB-2 
classification, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) may, as matter of discretion, 
grant a national interest waiver if the petitioner demonstrates: (I) 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. Matter of 
Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. 884 (AAO 2016). 
The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien 
Worker, finding 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 contends that she is eligible for a nationai interest waiver under the 
Dhanasar framework. In addition, she asserts that her documents "exceed the preponderance of the 
evidence standard." With regard to the standard of proof in this matter, a petitioner must establish 
that she meets each eligibility requirement of the benefit sought by a preponderance of the evidence. 
Matter of Chawathe, 25 I& N Dec. 369, 375-76 _(AAO 2010). In other words, a petitioner must 
show that what she claims is "more likely than not" or "probably" true. To determine whether a 
petitioner has met her burden under the preponderance standard, we consider not only the quantity, 
but also the quality (including relevance, probative value, and credibility) of the evidence. Id. at 
376; Matter of E-M-, 20 I&N Dec. 77, 79-80 (Comm'r 1989). 
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 under! ying 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 
Matter of D-C-1-D-M-
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 prosp~ctively 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 l&N Dec. 884. 1 Dhanasar states that after EB-2 eligibility has been established, 
USCIS may, as a matter of discretion, grant a ~ational interest waiver when the below prongs are 
met. 
The first prong, substantial merit and national importance, focuses on the specific endeavor that the 
foreign national proposes to undertake. The endeavor's meril 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 
1 In announcing this new framework, we vacated our prior precedent decision, Matter of New Yurk Srate Department of 
Transportation, 22 l&N Dec. 215 (Act. Assoc. Comm 'r 1998) (NYSDOT). 
2 
.
Maller of D-C-1-D-M-
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 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. 2 
II. ANALYSIS 
Although not addressed in the Director's decision, the record demonstr~tes that the Petitioner qualifies 
as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree. 3 The sole 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. 
With respect to the substantial merit and national importance of the proposed endeavor , the Petitioner 
indicates that she intends to continue her work as a teacher "in the field of special and inclusive 
education· in the United States, joining educational institutions and non-governmental organizations." 
s'he states: "I could provide not only special education classroom services but also help new 
educators by teaching them effective learning methodologies and strategies for children with 
intellectual and communication disabilities." In addition, the Petitioner provides a letter from the 
managing director of in stating that his company intends to "hire a 
professional that will be in charge of coping with special needs children including attention deficit 
disorder" and expressing •~interest in hiring [the Pe~itioner]." She also presents emails relating to 
special education teacher positions for which she applied. Lastly, the Petitioner offers a list of 
schools and institutions where she intends to pursue special education teacher job openings .4 
The record includes documents that demonstrate the substantial merit of the Petitioner's proposed 
endeavor. For example, she submits a report entitled that suggests 
steps for creating a better quality of life for people with disabilities. The Petitioner also provides 
2 See Dhanasar , 26 I&N Dec. at 888-91, for elaboration on these three prongs. 
3 The Petitioner holds the foreign equivalent of a U .S. baccalaureate degree in education, and has al kasl five years of 
progressive post-baccalaureate experience in her specialty equivalent to an advanced degree under the regulation at 8 C.F.R. 
§ 204.5(k)(3)(i)(I3). 
4 As the Petitioner is applying for a waiver of the job offer requirement, it is not necessary for her to have a job offer from a 
specific employer. However, we consider information about her prospective positions lo illustrate the capacity in which she 
intends to work. 
3 
Matter ofD·C·l·D·M· 
numerous articles discussing teacher shortages in the United States. We find that the Petitioner's 
proposed work teaching students with special needs and training other educators has substantial merit as 
it imparts valuable educational benefits and life skills to her pupils and fosters her fellow teachers' 
professional development. 
To evaluate whether the Petitioner's work satisfies the national importance requirement we look to 
evidence documenting the "potential prospective impact" of her work. The relevant question is not 
the importance of the field 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. Id. 
In the present matter, the Petitioner's evidence does not show that her proposed work has broader 
implications for her field, as opposed to being limited to the students and educators at the school or 
institution where she intends to teach. While the Petitioner asserts that she will "help new educators 
by teaching them effective learning methodologies and strategies for children with intellectual and 
communication disabilities," the record does not demonstrate that her proposed work will affect 
instructional practices, curricula, or teaching guidelines in field of special education more broadly. 
Furthermore, the reported shortage of special education teachers in the United States does not render 
the work of an individual teacher nationally important under the Dhanasar framework. 5 In general, the 
value of qualified teachers to U.S. national educational initiatives is collective, and the Petitioner has 
not shown that her proposed work stands to have wider implications for those initiatives. 
The Petitioner's documentation is not sufficien,t to demonstrate that her proposed endeavor is of 
national importance. While we acknowledge the merits of her work to develop teaching 
methodologies and learning strategies for her students with disabilities, the record does not 
demopstrate that the Petitioner's instructional ac~ivities offer benefits that extend beyond her school 
or institution to impact the field of special education more broadly. 6 As the Petitioner has not 
established that her specific endeavor's prospective impact supports a finding of national 
importance, she has not met the first prong of the Dhanasar framework. 
Because the documentation in the record does not establish the national importance of ht:r proposed 
endeavor as required by the first prong of the J?hanasar 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. 
5 We note that the U.S. Department of Labor addresses shortages of qualified workers through the labor certification process. 
Accordingly, a shortage alone docs not demonstrate that waiving the requirement of a labor certification would benefit the 
United States. 
6 In Dlumasar, we detennined 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. a(893. 
4 
Matter of D-C-1-D-M-
III. CONCLUSION 
As the Petitioner has not met the requisite first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework, we find 
that she has not established she is eligible for or otherwise merits a national interest waiver as a 
matter of discretion. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
Cite as Matter of D-C-1-D-M-, ID# 1429717 (AAO July 11, 2018) 
5