dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Special Education

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: FEB. 26, 2025 InRe: 37172577 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, a special education teacher, seeks employment-based second preference (EB-2) 
immigrant classification as an advanced degree professional, as well as a national interest waiver of 
the job offer requirement attached to this 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 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 pursuant to 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 Christo 's, Inc., 26 I&N Dec. 537, 537 n.2 (AAO 2015). Upon de novo review, 
we will dismiss the appeal. 
I. LAW 
To qualify for the underlying EB-2 visa classification, a petitioner must establish they are an advanced 
degree professional or an individual of exceptional ability in the sciences, arts, or business. Section 
203(b)(2)(A) of the Act. 
If a petitioner establishes eligibility for the underlying EB-2 classification, they must then demonstrate 
that they merit 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 
the framework for adjudicating national interest waiver petitions. Dhanasar states that U.S. 
Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) may, as matter of discretion, 1 grant a national interest 
waiver if the petitioner demonstrates that: 
• The proposed endeavor has both substantial merit and national importance; 
• The individual is well-positioned to advance their proposed endeavor; and 
1 See Flores v. Garland, 72 F.4th 85, 88 (5th Cir. 2023) (joining the Third, Ninth, Eleventh, and D.C. Circuit Courts of 
Appeals in concluding that USCIS ' decision to grant or deny a national interest waiver is discretionary in nature). 
• On balance, waiving the job offer requirement would benefit the United States. 
Id. 
II. ANALYSIS 
The Director determined the Petitioner qualified for EB-2 classification as an advanced degree 
professional because she submitted evidence of her bachelor's degree in pedagogy and five years of 
progressive post-baccalaureate experience in her field. We agree. The only issue on appeal is whether 
the Petitioner qualifies for a waiver of the job offer requirement in the national interest. 
In the business plan for her proposed company, I I the Petitioner stated she would work 
as Lead Special Educator for the company, which would be "a multidisciplinary space with a 
responsive approach, focused on the neurodevelopment and psychomotor skills of children with 
special needs inl ITexas." The business plan explains the company will offer a full range of 
services "from initial assessment to intervention and ongoing monitoring, ensuring holistic and 
continuous support for each child." 
A. Substantial Merit and National Importance 
The first Dhanasar prong, substantial merit and national importance, focuses on the specific endeavor 
that the individual proposes to undertake. Matter ofDhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. The endeavor's 
merit may be demonstrated in a range of areas such as business, entrepreneurialism, science, 
technology, culture, health, or education. Id. The Director determined the Petitioner's proposed 
endeavor has substantial merit. We agree. 
In determining whether the proposed endeavor has national importance, we consider its potential 
prospective impact. Id. This consideration may include whether the proposed endeavor has significant 
potential to employ U.S. workers (particularly in an economically depressed area), has other 
substantial positive economic effects, has national or even global implications within the field, or has 
other broader implications indicating national importance. Id. at 889-90. The Director determined the 
Petitioner did not establish that his proposed endeavor would have broader implications in his field 
beyond the individuals and entities using his work. 
On appeal, the Petitioner asserts the Director erred and her proposed endeavor has national importance 
because it will address the shortage of educators specializing in inclusive education by offering 
ongoing training and development programs for teachers and promoting a culture of empathy and 
understanding. The Petitioner further asserts her company will have a significant economic impact by 
creating direct and indirect jobs inl Texas. The Petitioner's business plan projects the company 
will employ 16 individuals the first year increasing to 35 individuals by the fifth year. The Petitioner 
acknowledged thatl I Texas is not an economically depressed area. The record also does not 
establish that the employment of 16 to 35 people constitutes job creation on a level commensurate 
with national importance. 
The Petitioner also claims her proposed endeavor will benefit social welfare by providing personalized 
education and therapy services for children with special needs. While the record indicates the 
2 
Petitioner's company would provide beneficial services to her company's clients, it does not establish 
that those services would extend beyond her company's clients to impact her field more broadly in a 
manner indicative of national importance. 
The Petitioner also asserts her company will have national and global implications in inclusive 
education through the dissemination of innovative and adaptive educational practices. Specifically, 
the Petitioner states her company will provide services including early intervention, specialized 
education, and family support. The record does not demonstrate that any of these services are unique, 
innovative, or otherwise have national or global implications in her field. See id. at 889. ( discussing 
improved manufacturing processes or medical advances as examples of national or even global 
implications within a particular field). 
The Petitioner submitted a letter from S-Q-2, Director o expressing her 
opinion that the Petitioner qualifies for a national interest waiver. S-Q- states the Petitioner's company 
will have an economic impact by extending its services through online platforms and integrating 
research and development into practice. S-Q- does not indicate that the effect of these aspects of the 
Petitioner's company would extend beyond her company's clients to impact her field more broadly on 
a level commensurate with national importance. S-Q- asserts the Petitioner's company will broadly 
enhance societal welfare by promoting inclusivity and understanding autism and related conditions 
within society and providing direct services to individuals with special needs. S-Q- does not articulate 
how the Petitioner's company's promotion of inclusivity would extend beyond her company's clients 
to impact her field more broadly in a manner indicative of national importance. 
S-Q- also claims the Petitioner's company will have national or even global implications in her field 
by providing comprehensive services that include early intervention, specialized education, and family 
support. S-Q- does not identify any specific services of the Petitioner's company that has received 
recognition as innovative or impactful within her field such that they would have national or global 
implications in her field indicative of national importance. See id. (discussing improved 
manufacturing processes or medical advances as examples of national or even global implications 
within a particular field). S-Q- also asserts the Petitioner's proposed endeavor closely aligns with 
national priorities regarding the education and integration of individuals with disabilities. However, 
our assessment of national importance does not focus on the importance of issues within a field in 
general, but instead "focuses on the specific endeavor that the foreign national proposes to undertake." 
Id. 
On appeal, the Petitioner resubmits support letters from colleagues. F-R-A- praises the Petitioner's 
past work at and expresses confidence in the Petitioner's "potential to 
revolutionize inclusive and special education in the United States." F-R-A- does not, however, address 
the Petitioner's specific proposed endeavor. L-F-C- praises the Petitioner's past work and states the 
Petitioner could improve inclusive education by implementing innovative and personalized 
pedagogical practices that meet the needs of students with disabilities, developing new teaching 
methodologies, creating extracurricular programs that promote social inclusion, and ensuring schools 
comply with federal guidelines for special education. L-F-C- does not indicate that the effect of these 
activities would extend beyond the Petitioner's company's clients to impact her field more broadly in 
2 We use initials to protect the privacy of the referenced individuals. 
3 
a manner commensurate with national importance. M-A-A- praises the Petitioner's past work and her 
ability to implement inclusive practices, educate teachers, transform institutions, develop community 
programs, formulate educational policies, support families, and contribute to educational research. M­
A-A- does not discuss the Petitioner's proposed endeavor or indicate that her future work would extend 
beyond her company's clients to impact her field more broadly at a level indicative of national 
importance. 
In sum, the record does not establish that the Petitioner's company has significant potential to employ 
U.S. workers (particularly in an economically depressed area), has other substantial positive economic 
effects, has national or even global implications within her field, or has other broader implications 
indicating national importance. Consequently, the Petitioner does not meet the first Dhanasar prong. 
B. The Remaining Dhanasar Prongs 
The Petitioner has not established 
the national importance of her specific proposed endeavor and she 
does not meet the first prong of the Dhanasar framework. As this issue is dispositive of the 
Petitioner's appeal, we decline to reach and hereby reserve determination of her eligibility under the 
second and third prongs of the Dhanasar framework. See INS v. Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. 24, 25 (1976) 
(stating that "courts and agencies are not required to make findings on issues the decision of which is 
unnecessary to the results they reach"); see also Matter of L-A-C-, 26 I&N Dec. 516, 526 n.7 (BIA 
2015) (declining to reach alternative issues on appeal where an applicant is otherwise ineligible). 
III. CONCLUSION 
The 
Petitioner has not established the national importance of her proposed endeavor and does not meet 
the first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework. Consequently, she has not demonstrated that 
she is eligible for or merits a waiver of the job offer requirement in the national interest as a matter of 
discretion. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
4