dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Supply Chain Management

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re : 12309622 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: ITJNE 15, 2021 
Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker (Advanced Degree, Exceptional Ability, National 
Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, a global supply chain director, 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 qualified 
for classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree , but 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 he is eligible for the national interest waiver. 
In these proceedings, it is the Petitioner ' s burden to establish eligibility for the requested benefit 
Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361. Upon de nova 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. ... 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 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 I&N Dec. 884 (AAO 2016). 1 Dhanasarstates that, after a petitioner has established 
eligibility for EB-2 classification, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) may, as a 
matter of discretion, 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 off er and thus of a labor certification. 
The first prong, substantial merit and national importance, 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 offerorforthe 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 o{Ncw York State Department of 
Transportation, 22 I&NDec. 215 (Act. Assoc. Comm'r 1998) (NYSDOT). 
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. 2 
II. ANALYSIS 
According to the Petitioner, his "proposed endeavor is to work in supply chain development for the 
I !sector in the U.S. and be a key support to small/sub-tier American companies that supply 
or wish to supply materials and services to the I lmarket and become more competitive, thus 
reducing supply chain risks." He further stated that he endeavors to "create and implement a 
development project for small and medium-sized American and U.S.-based companies in the 
I I sector, similar to the 
1
one [he] developed in Brazil, enabling American companies to 
support the expected growth of the market." 
The Director found that the Petitioner qualifies as a member of the professions holding an advanced 
degree. Although the Director found substantial merit in the proposed endeavor, he concluded that 
Petitioner did not establish its national importance. The Director also concluded the record did not 
satisfy the second and third Dhanasar prongs. For the reasons discussed below, we agree that the 
Petitioner has not established that a waiver of the requirement of a job offer is warranted. 
On appeal, the Petitioner again discusses his experience and his prior career accomplishments in 
Brazil. However, the Petitioner's supply chain expertise and record of success in previous projects 
are considerations under Dhanasar's second prong, which "shifts the focus from the proposed 
endeavor to the foreign national." Id. at 890. 
In Dhanasar, we 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. 
Here, the Petitioner relies on information regarding the economic benefit of a variety of industries. 
However, in determining national importance, the relevant question is not the importance of the field, 
industry, or profession in which the individual will work; instead we focus on the "the specific 
endeavor that the foreign national proposes to undertake." Id. at 889. In other words, the issue is not 
the broader implications of the economic benefits of the logistics, transportation, supply chain 
development, or aerospace industries, but rather the potential prospective impact of the Petitioner's 
specific proposed work as a global supply chain director. The Petitioner's focus on the economic 
benefits of these fields in general does not address how the perf 01mance of the planned activities under 
the endeavor would have broader implications, rising to the level of national importance as 
contemplated by Dhanasar. 
2 SccDhanasar, 26l&NDec. at 888-91, for elaboration onthesethreeprongs. 
3 
While the Petitioner generally contends his proposed endeavor will "serv[ e] both social and economic 
needs," he fails to establish that the economic benefits of his work would extend beyond his potential 
employer(s) and/orclients. 3 Nor has the Petitioner shown that his particular work would have broader 
implications in the supply chain or logistics fields. Furthermore, the Petitioner has not demonstrated 
that his proposed employment as a global supply chain director has significant potential to employ 
U.S. workers or otherwise offers substantial positive economic effects for our nation, as contemplated 
in Dhanasar. 
For the above reasons, the Petitioner has not established that the proposed endeavor has national 
importance, as required by the firstDhanasar prong, and therefore is not eligible for a national interest 
waiver. Since this issue is dispositive of the Petitioner's appeal, we decline to reach and herebyreseive 
the appellate arguments regarding the remaining issues. 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"); 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 
As the Petitioner has not met the requisite first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework, we 
conclude that the Petitioner has not established eligibility for, or otherwise merits, a national interest 
waiver as a matter of discretion. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
3 Similarly, inDhanasar, we dete1minedthatthePetitioner's teachingactivitiesdid notrise to the levelofhavingnational 
importance because they would notimpacthis field more broadly. Id. at 893. 
4