dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: System Engineering

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 26578639 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: APR. 26, 2023 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, a system engineer, seeks second preference immigrant classification as a member of 
the professions holding an advanced degree or as an individual of exceptional ability, as well as a 
national interest waiver of the job offer requirement attached to this EB-2 classification . 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 the Petitioner had not 
established 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. 8 C.F.R. § 103.3. 
The Petitioner bears the burden of proof to demonstrate eligibility by a preponderance of the evidence. 
Matter of Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369, 375-76 (AAO 2010). We review the questions in this matter 
de novo. Matter of Christa's, Inc., 26 I&N Dec. 537,537 n.2 (AAO 2015). 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. Section 203(b )(2)(B)(i) of the Act. Next, a 
petitioner must then demonstrate they merit a discretionary waiver of the job offer requirement "in the 
national interest." Section 203(b)(2)(B)(i) of the Act. Matter of Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. 884, 889 
(AAO 2016) provides that U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) may, as matter of 
discretion 1, grant a national interest waiver if the petitioner shows: 
• The proposed endeavor has both substantial merit and national importance; 
• The individual is well-positioned to advance their proposed endeavor; and 
• On balance, waiving the job offer requirement would benefit the United States. 
1 See also Poursina v. USCIS, 936 F.3d 868 (9th Cir. 2019) (finding USCIS' decision to grant or deny a national interest 
waiver to be discretionary in nature) . 
II. ANALYSIS 
The Director concluded the Petitioner did not qualify as an individual of exceptional ability; however, 
the Director indicated the Petitioner's eligibility as a member of the professions holding an advanced 
degree. Accordingly, the remaining issue to be determined on appeal is whether the Petitioner has 
established a waiver of the requirement of a job offer, and thus a labor certification, would be in the 
national interest. 
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 an "Autobiographical Statement" 
indicating: 
I would want nothing more than to become a successful entrepreneur and professional in 
the United States of America as there is no place like America where dreams of 
hardworking entrepreneurs come true. 
I am currently in the process of realizing myself as a DevOps engineer. I am studying to 
get all the necessary certificates to start my career in the United States. 
It is worth mentioning because of me being an Au-Pair for one and a half years I would 
like to open my own business with services providing support to kids. I would like to 
open a place where children can immerse themselves in another world and pass different 
quests and tasks to develop their logical skills using immersive technology. This place 
will be designed to acquire the necessary skills so that children can explore the world 
around them without causing any injuries to themselves or others. I would like to 
implement this with the help of augmented and virtual reality technologies. The main task 
of this project is to get the necessary life skills in the game format. 
My education and professional experience have uniquely prepared me for a continuation 
of my very successful DevOps career in the United States. I would love nothing more 
than to contribute my talent, experience, and ability as a Systems Engineer to the benefit 
of the United States of America .... 
In response to the Director's request for evidence (RFE), the Petitioner submitted a business plan for  
reflectmg : 
is a a standard tech-educational company located atl FL, USA. As an 
exemplary software department, we are well-positioned to provide software which uses 
I to create labs such as: chemistry, physics and all scientific programs using 
Virtual and Augmented reality. This software will help students learn science with much 
enthusiasm without damaging their health. The main point of this idea is to make 
education in the US easier and better irrespective of the quality of teachers the school has. 
2 
The Director determined the Petitioner demonstrated the proposed endeavor's substantial merit but not 
its national importance. On appeal, the Petitioner claims she "has proposed an endeavor of a 
technology Company that will create jobs for the US economy." For the reasons discussed below, the 
Petitioner has not sufficiently shown the national importance aspect of her proposed endeavor. 
At the outset, the Petitioner stresses her "education and professional experience." The Petitioner's 
education, experience, 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. 
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 specific endeavor that the 
foreign national proposes to undertake." See Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. The Petitioner provided 
evidence relating to the science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields; 
occupational outlook for computer systems analysts; employment shortages; and the immigration 
impact of the labor force. Here, the Petitioner must demonstrate the national importance of her 
specific, proposed endeavor of owning and operating a tech-educational company rather than the 
importance of STEM, labor shortages, or immigration. In Dhanasar, we noted that "we look for 
broader implications" of the proposed endeavor and that "[aa ]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. 
With respect to the first prong, as in all cases, the evidence must demonstrate that a STEM endeavor 
has both substantial merit and national importance. 2 Many proposed endeavors that aim to advance 
STEM technologies and research, whether in academic or industry settings, not only have substantial 
merit in relation to U.S. science and technology interests, but also have sufficiently broad potential 
implications to demonstrate national importance. 3 On the other hand, while proposed classroom 
teaching activities in STEM, for example, may have substantial merit in relation to U.S. educational 
interests, such activities, by themselves, generally are not indicative of an impact in the field of STEM 
education more broadly, and therefore generally would not establish their national importance. 4 Thus, 
simply pursuing an endeavor in a STEM field does not automatically demonstrate eligibility for a 
national interest waiver. In this case, the Petitioner does not intend to advance STEM technologies 
and research. Rather, the Petitioner seeks to own and operate a tech-educational company "to help 
students most especially in public schools learn natural sciences effectively." 
Moreover, 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 
business plan does not offer specific information demonstrating the prospective impact of her proposed 
endeavor rises to the level of national importance. In Dhanasar, we determined the petitioner's 
2 See generally 6 USC1S Policy Manual F.5(D)(2), https://uscis.gov/policymanual. 
3 Id. 
4 Id. 
3 
teaching activities did not rise to the level of having national importance because they would not 
impact his field more broadly. Id. at 893. Here, the business plan contains vague, general assertions 
without showing how her owning and operating I I stand to sufficiently extend beyond her 
prospective students, to impact the education industry or the U.S. economy more broadly at a level 
commensurate with national importance. Without specific, detailed information, the Petitioner did not 
establish the "potential prospective impact" of her endeavor. 
Likewise, the Petitioner did not show her proposed endeavor has significant potential to employ U.S. 
workers or otherwise offers substantial positive economic effects for our nation. The business plan 
does not assert any potential job creation or revenues. The Petitioner did not demonstrate her company 
would employ a significant population or workers in the I Florida area or her endeavor would 
offer the region or its population a substantial economic benefit through such employment levels or 
business activity. Without evidence regarding any projected U.S. economic impact or job creation 
attributable to her future work, the record does not reflect any benefits to the U.S. regional or national 
economy would reach the level of "substantial positive economic effects" contemplated by Dhanasar. 
Id. at 890. 
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. 5 
III. CONCLUSION 
As the Petitioner has not met the requisite first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework, we conclude 
that she has not demonstrated eligibility 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 See INS v. Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. 24. 25 (1976) (stating that ·'courts and agencies are not required to make findings on 
issues in the decision of which is unnecessary to the results they reach"); see also Matter of L-A-C-, 26 l&N Dec. 516. 526 
n. 7 (BIA 2015) ( declining to reach alternative issues on appeal where an applicant is otherwise ineligible). 
4