dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Textile Research

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: MARCH 7, 2025 In Re: 37288422 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, a textile researcher, 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. § 1l 53(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). 
I 
• 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 he submitted evidence of his Master of Science degree from _____ 
I We agree. The only issue on appeal is whether the Petitioner qualifies for a waiver of the 
job offer requirement in the national interest. 
The Petitioner initially stated his proposed endeavor was "to enhance the protective and functional 
properties of personal protective textiles in order to improve their sustainability, ergonomic design, 
and long-term wearability." The Petitioner explained he would pursue his proposed endeavor while 
earning his doctoral degree from the _______ and would circulate his work through peer-
reviewed publications in journals and conference proceedings. 
In response to the Director's request for evidence (RFE), the Petitioner further specified that his "goal 
is to develop sustainable PPTs [personal protective textiles] that reduce dependency on traditional 
energy sources and generate electricity from incorporated nanomaterials." The Petitioner explained 
he aimed to develop "innovative personal protective textiles that integrate piezoelectric and 
photovoltaic nanomaterials" and evaluate "the thermal properties, ergonomics, and comfort levels of 
personal protective textiles integrated with nanogenerators." 
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. Id. 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 his proposed endeavor would have broad 
implications or significantly contribute to resolving critical national challenges. On appeal, the 
Petitioner asserts the Director did not address the relevant evidence submitted and erroneously 
imposed a "national in scope" standard. To the extent the Director indicates a proposed endeavor must 
be national in scope, we withdraw those portions of the Director's decision. 
The Petitioner asserts his proposed endeavor has national importance because it will optimize the 
sustainability and effectiveness of the U.S. textile industry to protect both the nation's environment 
and its population. In support of this claim, the Petitioner cites his eight co-authored articles published 
2 
in journals and conference proceedings. The Petitioner submitted evidence that his articles have been 
cited a total of 14 times. The Petitioner did not submit evidence of how many of these citations were 
by independent researchers. 
The Petitioner initially submitted two support letters. C-F-,2 Associate Professor in Fashion Design 
and Merchandising at describes the Petitioner's work on mitigating the 
environmental impacts of textile engineering processes in Bangladesh and praises the Petitioner for 
advancing the field of textile engineering through his capacity to inform sustainable practices in the 
textile industry, but does not discuss the Petitioner's proposed endeavor. L-B-, Professor of Design 
and Merchandising at _________ praises the Petitioner's work on the use of 
compression socks to ensure postural stability and sustainability in clothing production, but also does 
not discuss his proposed endeavor. 
In response to the Director's request for evidence, the Petitioner submitted additional support letters. 
D-S-, Chief Executive Officer of ____________ discusses how three research 
teams relied on the Petitioner's work in their own research and states the Petitioner's research has 
paved the way "for the widespread implementation of sustainable production practices that reduce the 
carbon footprint in textile manufacturing." D-S- praises the Petitioner as "an extremely influential 
researcher," but does not specifically discuss the Petitioner's proposed endeavor. H-G-, Assistant 
Professor of Textile Development and Marketing at the praises the 
Petitioner for significantly advancing the field "through his implementation of eco-friendly practices 
for sustainable textile production" and describes how another research team relied on the Petitioner's 
work, but also does not discuss the Petitioner's proposed endeavor. M-R-R- praises the Petitioner's 
research on the optimization of sub-clinical and clinical compression socks to improve postural 
stability and describes how two other research teams relied upon his work, but does not address the 
Petitioner's proposed endeavor. 
The Petitioner also submitted a second letter from C-F- describing the Petitioner's role in research on 
trawler fishermen's personal flotation devices which was funded by the Centers for Disease Control 
and Prevention's National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. C-F- commends the 
Petitioner's leadership role, but does not articulate how his work on this project relates to the specific 
goals of his proposed endeavor. 
The Petitioner submitted articles on issues related to his research areas including personal protective 
equipment (PPE), the environmental impact of textile production, sustainable fabrics, environmental 
risks, fishing and hunting injuries, other workplace injuries and illnesses, smart protective apparel in 
workplace safety, revolutionary fibers and textiles manufacturing, manufacturing efficiency, energy­
harvesting clothes, nanotechnology, nanomaterials, the textiles industry, clean energy, piezoelectric 
fibers, photovoltaic fabrics, nanoparticle modified textiles for protective clothing, first responders' 
protective gloves, thermal sterilization of PPE, NIOSH protective clothing, heat-transmitting NyCo 
textile, thermoelectric-integrated welder suit, and PPE manufacturing in the United States. While they 
attest to the importance of these topics, these articles do not discuss the Petitioner's proposed endeavor. 
Our assessment of national importance does not focus on the importance of a field or issues impacting 
2 We use initials to protect the privacy of the referenced individual. 
3 
a field in general, but instead "focuses on the specific endeavor that the foreign national proposes to 
undertake." Id. at 889. 
The record shows the Petitioner has published his research in articles cited by other researchers in his 
field and has made significant contributions to his field. The Petitioner also submitted evidence that 
his proposed endeavor involves advanced engineering materials and development of materials with 
new properties, a critical and emerging technology and subfield included in the National Science and 
Technology Council's Critical and Emerging Technologies List Update. The Petitioner has not, 
however, established that citations to his previous work indicate that his proposed endeavor will have 
broad implications in his field on a level commensurate with national importance. Overall, the relevant 
evidence does not demonstrate that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor will have a potential 
prospective impact indicative of 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 his specific proposed endeavor and he 
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 his 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). 
ITT. CONCLUSION 
The 
Petitioner has not established the national importance of his proposed endeavor and does not meet 
the first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework. Consequently, he has not demonstrated that he 
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