dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Telecommunications

MATTER OF \,J ___ _ 
APPEAL OF TEXAS SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE : OCT. 22, 2019 
PETITION: FORM I-140, IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER 
The Petitioner, a.__ ____________________ __.seeks second preference 
immigrant classification for the Beneficiary 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 has established the beneficiary 's 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: (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 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 I-140 , Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker , 
finding that the Beneficiary 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 submits additional documentation and a brief asserting that the Beneficiary 
is eligible for a national interest waiver under the Dhanasar framework. 
Upon de nova review, we will dismiss the appeal. 
I. LAW 
To establish eligibility for a national interest waiver , a petitioner must first demonstrate the 
beneficiary 's 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. 
Matter of M._ __ _. 
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 ofjob 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 I&N Dec. 884. 1 Dhanasar states that after EB-2 eligibility has been established, USCIS 
may, as a matter of discretion, grant a national interest waiver when the below prongs are met. See 
also Poursina v. USCIS, No. 17-16579, 2019 WL 4051593 (Aug. 28, 2019) (finding USCIS' decision 
to grant or deny a national interest waiver to be discretionary in nature). 
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 
1 In announcing this new framework, we vacated our prior precedent decision, Matter of New York State Department of 
Transportation, 22 l&N Dec. 215 (Act. Assoc. Comm'r 1998) (NYSDOT). 
2 
Matter of~~-~ 
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 
The Director found that the Beneficiary qualifies as a member of the professions holding an advanced 
degree. 3 The remaining 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. For the 
reasons discussed below, we agree with the Director that the Petitioner has not sufficiently 
demonstrated the national importance of the Beneficiary's proposed endeavor under the first prong of 
the Dhanasar analytical framework. 
The Petitioner indicated that it intends to continue to employ the Beneficiary as a technical product 
manager. 4 The record includes a letter froml I vice president of human resources for the 
Petitioner, stating thaµh.e ..... .B.epeficiary's proposed endeavor involves developing and intlgrating I 
Internet Protocol (IP) L___J routers to enable high-speed, secure and efficient broadband 
In addition,! !asserted that the Beneficiary's work is aimed at 
"managing the development of [the Petitioner's] newest I lrouters, which will offer higher 
volumes of data throughput as well as greater security and mobility for end users across the globe." 
She farther explained: 
Specifically, [the Beneficiary] defines hardware, software and networking 
requirements to meet commercial and defense requirements for numerous next -
generation routers that will update the current fleet of IP-basedl I routers in [the 
Petitioner'sll I platform. These routers will meet the new DVB-S2X standards, 
an extension of the DVB-S2 I I digital broadcasting standard, which offers 
efficiency gains up to 51 %. [The Bene
1
iciary] I will also continue to guide the 
implementation of [ the Petitioner's] newest routers into the networks of some 
of the leading I ~ network providers, such asl I ;ind 
I 
2 See Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 888-91, for elaboration on these three prongs. 
3 The record reflects that he received a Master of Science degree in telecommunications froml I University 
in May 2010. 
4 As the Petitioner is applying for a waiver of the job offer requirement, it is not necessary for the Beneficiary to have a 
job offer from a specific employer. However, we consider information about his cunent position to illustrate the capacity 
in which he intends to work in order to detennine whether his proposed endeavor meets the requirements of the first prong 
of the Dhanasar framework. 
3 
Matter of M._ __ _. 
The record contains additional letters of support discussing the Beneficiary's proposed work as a 
technical product manager for the Petitioner. 5 For example,! ~ Senior Vice President 
of Global Sales atl I a I !technology company, stated that the Petitioner is 
introducing its "next-generation DVB-S2X transmission technology" and a "range of new IP-based 
DVB-S2X routers which leverage the DVB-S2X technology." 6 With regard to this project,D 
I indicated that the Beneficiary's pTposed fork involves re "impllementation stage of this 
new product" and developing the "IP-based routers on the platform for supporting 
maritime and aeronautical applications." He further explained that that the Beneficiary's services are 
necessary for "developing, testing, and implementing IP-based protocols and IP-based I I 
routers" and ensuring that they "meet the U.S. Department of Defense's (DOD) stringent transmission 
security requirements and performance demands of U.S. industry." 
Likewise, I l general manager ofl I a company that "specializes in engineering 
and manufacturing I I systems," asserted that the Beneficiary's proposed 
work involves using his "skills to define and implement support for DVB-S2X transmission 
technology on [the Petitioner's] IP basedl lrouter iQ desktop, iQ 200 Rackmount." He also 
stated that this work encompasses "validating these new design architectures meet the spectrum 
requirements set by the governing bodies in addition to meeting the high throughput and security 
requirements of commercial and government customers." 
Furthermore] 7 a project manager and senior systems engineer withl I a British 
~----------~[c'ompany that provides global mobile.__ ________ __. services, 
stated that the Beneficiary "is continrng to 
1
rive the IP solution design and architecture for [the 
Petitioner's] next generation IP based routers namely the iQ 200, iQ 500, and iQ 800." In 
addition,! I indicated that his company is relying on the Beneficiary's ongoin involvement 
in the Global Xpress (GX)I I worldwide broadband network initiative. 
further noted that this initiative seeks to "develop and deploy new satellites, upgrades an ........... _m-no_v_a...,...t1_0_n_.s 
to meet the ever-growing needs of the government and the commercial sectors," but did not discuss 
the specific GX projects the Beneficiary plans to undertake on behalf of the Petitioner. 7 
The Petitioner submitted articles and reports relating to Russia's targeting of internet routers for 
espionage, DOD's "2018 National Defense Strategv
1
" the Defense Business Board's 
recommendations to help DOD leverage opportunities from .... [ -------~I providers, a pilot 
program to integrate commercial industry capabilities into DOD I I operations, and 
recommendations from the Defense Science Board's Task Force o 
5 We discuss a sampling of these letters, but have reviewed and considered each one. 
6 The record does not show that the Petitioner was among the team of engineers who invented the DVB-S2X transmission 
technology. 
7 Regarding the Beneficiary' S prior work for the GX! I systemJ I stated: "[The Benefici~ry] was rt only 
involved in the planning of GX, he spent three years validating and integrting [thel Petitioner's] IP-base routers 
intol Is GX network and setting up the unique infrastructure of GX teleports. He also performed the 
testing and validating of networking features and hardware and software failover mechanisms .... " The Petitioner's 
previm1d I network planning, integration, and validation projects are considerations under 
Dhanasar's second prong, which "shifts the focus from the proposed endeavor to the foreign national." Id. at 890. The 
issue here under the first prong is the potential prospective impact of the Petitioner's proposed work as a technical product 
manager and whether it rises to the level of national imp01iance. 
4 
Matter of~ .... __ ___, 
~--------- The record also includes the National Defense Authorization Act for 2016, 
a Defense Information Systems Agency overview of l I 
.__ __ ___.I' an article froml I promoting the Petitioner's Evolution® product line of 
remote communications network technologies, and various marketing materials and information 
relating to the Petitioner's products and services. In addition, the Petitioner presented a study 
indicating that the U.S. oil and gas industry supported 10.3 million jobs in 2015, information about 
I !services in the oil and gas market, articles about the increase in offshore oil production, and 
documentation about I I and its GX I !system. While the Director determined that the 
aforementioned information and letters of support show the Beneficiary' proposed work developing and 
integrating! !routers has substantial merit, he concluded that the evidence was not sufficient to 
demonstrate this endeavor's national importance. 
On appeal, the Petitioner contends that the aforementioned letters "serve as sufficient evidence on 
their face to clearly define [the Beneficiary's] proposed endeavor and how it directly impacts the 
~---~lfield, a recognized industry of national importance." The Petitioner also argues that the 
Director did not "grasp the sensitive and confidential nature of the proposed endeavor." 
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 "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 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. 
To evaluate whether the proposed endeavor satisfies the national importance requirement we look to 
evidence documenting the "potential prospective impact" of the Beneficiary's work. The Petitioner 
contends that the national importance of the Beneficiary's endeavor is evident from the widespread 
usage of id .... __ ___.~outers by DOD, civilian government a encies and commercial industry and from 
the company's innovative technologies relating to IP-base routers. But the Petitioner has not 
demonstrated that the economic implications and ~---------~ technological 
advancements resulting from its operations would be attributable to the Beneficiary's particular role 
as a technical product manager to an extent that his proposed work holds national importance. The 
issue here is not the broader implications of the company's innovations in.__ ________ ~or 
the utilization of its products by government and industry, but rather the potential prospective impact 
of the Beneficiary's specific proposed work as a technical product manager. 
In Dhanasar we determined 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. at 893. Here, we find 
the record does not show that the Beneficiary's proposed endeavor stands to sufficiently extend 
beyond his employer, its business partners, and its clientele to impact the~-----------' 
industry more broadly at a level commensurate with national importance. Nor has the Petitioner shown 
that the particular work the Beneficiary proposes to undertake offers original innovations that 
contribute to advancements in the I I industry, or otherwise has broader 
5 
Matter of vi.__ _ ____, 
implications for the telecommunications field. Accordingly, without sufficient documentary evidence 
of their broader impact, the Beneficiary's proposed IPI I router development and integration 
services for the Petitioner do not meet the "national importance" element of the first prong of the 
Dhanasar framework. 
Furthermore, the Petitioner has not demonstrated that the Beneficiary's proposed endeavor has 
significant potential to employ U.S. workers or otherwise offers substantial positive economic effects 
for our nation. Without sufficient information or evidence regarding any projected U.S. economic impact 
or job creation attributable to the Beneficiary's future technical product management work, the record 
does not show that benefits to the regional or national economy resulting from his projects would reach 
the level of "substantial positive economic effects" contemplated by Dhanasar. Id. at 890. Accordingly, 
the Beneficiary's proposed work does not meet the first prong of the Dhanasar framework. 
Because the documentation in the record does not establish the national importance of the Beneficiary's 
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 the Beneficiary's eligibility 
under the second and third prongs outlined in Dhanasar, therefore, would serve no meaningful purpose. 
III. CONCLUSION 
As the Petitioner has not met the requisite first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework, we find that 
it has not established the Beneficiary is eligible 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. 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 of Skirball Cultural Ctr., 25 I&N Dec. 799,806 (AAO 2012). Here, that burden has 
not been met. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
Cite as Matter ofvl._ _ ___.lID# 4688463 (AAO Oct. 22, 2019) 
6