dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Tourism Industry

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: MAY 30, 2024 In Re: 31261073 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, a consultant in the tourism industry, seeks classification under the employment-based, 
second-preference (EB-2) immigrant visa category and a waiver of the category's job-offer 
requirement. See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 203(b)(2)(B)(i), 8 U.S.C. 
§ 1153(b)(2)(B)(i). U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has discretion to excuse job 
offers in this category - and thus related requirements for certifications from the U.S. Department of 
Labor (DOL)- if petitioners demonstrate that waivers of these U.S.-worker protections would be "in 
the national interest." Id.; see also Flores v. Garland, 72 F.4th 85, 88 (5th Cir. 2023) (holding that 
decisions on national interest waiver requests are discretionary). 
The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the petition. The Director concluded that the 
Petitioner demonstrated neither his eligibility for EB-2 classification nor the merits of his national 
interest waiver request. On appeal, the Petitioner contends that the Director made both legal and 
factual errors. 
The Petitioner bears the burden of demonstrating eligibility for the requested benefit by a 
preponderance of the evidence. Matter of Chawathe, 25 l&N Dec. 369, 375-76 (AAO 2010). 
Exercising de novo appellate review, see Matter ofChristo 's, Inc., 26 I&N Dec. 537, 537 n.2 (AAO 
2015), we conclude that he has established his EB-2 eligibility. But we agree with the Director that 
the Petitioner has not demonstrated the claimed "national importance" of his proposed endeavor. We 
will therefore dismiss the appeal. 
I. LAW 
To establish eligibility for national interest waivers, petitioners must first demonstrate their 
qualifications for the EB-2 category, either as members of the professions holding "advanced degrees" 
or noncitizens of "exceptional ability" in the sciences, arts, or business. See section 203(b )(2)(A) of 
the Act. To protect the jobs of U.S. workers, this immigrant visa category usually requires prospective 
employers to offer noncitizens jobs and to obtain DOL certifications to permanently employ them in 
the country. See section 212(a)(5)(D) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(5)(D). Petitioners may avoid the 
job offer/labor certification requirements by demonstrating that waivers of the U.S.-worker protections 
would be in the national interest. Section 203(b )(2)(B)(i) of the Act. 
Neither the Act nor regulations define the term "national interest." So, to adjudicate these waiver 
requests, we have established a framework. If otherwise qualified as advanced degree professionals 
or noncitizens of exceptional ability, petitioners may warrant waivers of the job-offer/labor 
certification requirements by demonstrating that: 
• Their proposed U.S. work has "substantial merit" and "national importance;" 
• They are "well positioned" to advance their intended endeavors; and 
• On balance, waivers of the job-offer/labor certification requirements would benefit the United 
States. 
Matter ofDhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. 884, 889-91 (AAO 2016). 
TI. ANALYSIS 
A. The Proposed Endeavor 
The record shows that the Petitioner, a Mexican native and citizen, earned a bachelor of economics 
degree in his home country. He then gained more than 25 years of experience as a business consultant, 
including 13 years as a business owner, chief executive officer, and consultant in the tourism industry. 
The Petitioner proposes to operate a U.S. business providing consulting services to tourism 
development projects in rural areas. He previously developed a successful hotel in a rural part of 
Mexico. To advance his proposed U.S. endeavor, the Petitioner has acquired a U.S. limited liability 
company. He contends that his business would "creat[ e] a cascade of economic and cultural benefits" 
to U.S. rural areas. 
B. EB-2 Eligibility 
The Petitioner seeks EB-2 eligibility as an advanced degree professional. He claims possession of a 
foreign degree equivalent to a U.S. bachelor's degree followed by more than five years of progressive 
experience in the specialty. See 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2) (defining the term "advanced degree"). 
We agree with the Director that the Petitioner has demonstrated his possession of the foreign 
equivalent of a U.S. bachelor's degree in economics. He provided copies of his four-year licenciado 
en economia, a university certificate of studies, and a professional, independent evaluation equating 
the Mexican credential to a U.S. baccalaureate in economics. 
To prove qualifying experience, a petitioner must submit letters from former employers stating their 
names, titles, and addresses, and describing the noncitizen's experience. 8 C.F.R. § 204.S(g)(l). The 
Director concluded that the Petitioner's employment letters did not comply with the regulation. 
The Director, however, overlooked a letter in the original filing from a former employer of the 
Petitioner. The letter confirms his post-baccalaureate employment as a business consultant in Mexico 
for more than six years. In response to the Director's request for additional evidence, the Petitioner 
submitted letters from other employers and, on appeal, provides more evidence. But we need not 
consider these later documents. The letter in the original filing complies with regulatory requirements 
2 
and sufficiently demonstrates the Petitioner's possession of at least five years of progressive, post­
baccalaureate experience in business consulting. Thus, contrary to the Director's decision, the 
Petitioner has established his qualifications for the EB-2 category as an advanced degree professional. 
C. Substantial Merit 
We agree with the Director that the Petitioner has demonstrated that his proposed endeavor has 
substantial merit. A proposed venture may have substantial merit if it "has the potential to create a 
significant economic impact" or relates to "research, pure science, and the furtherance of human 
knowledge." Matter of Dhanasar, 26 T&N Dec. at 889. The Petitioner provided evidence that his 
proposed consultancy could potentially provide jobs and other economic benefits to U.S. rural areas. 
He has therefore established that his proposed venture has substantial merit. 
D. National Importance 
When determining whether a proposed endeavor has national importance, USCTS must focus on the 
particular venture, specifically on its "potential prospective impact." Matter of Dhanasar, 26 I&N 
Dec. at 889. "An undertaking may have national importance, for example, because it has national or 
even global implications within a particular field, such as those resulting from certain improved 
manufacturing processes or medical advances." Id. A nationally important venture may even focus 
on only one geographic area of the United States. Id. at 889-90. "An 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. 
The Director found insufficient evidence that the benefits of the Petitioner's proposed venture would 
extend beyond his business and clients to more broadly affect the national economy or the U.S. tourism 
industry. The Director stated: "The petitioner has not established that their proposed work has 
implications beyond their current company ( or any prospective employers), businesses partners, 
alliances, and/or unidentified clients at a level sufficient to demonstrate the national importance of 
their endeavor." 
On appeal, the Petitioner notes that the Director disregarded his submission of an independent 
economic impact study of the proposed endeavor. Assuming that the Petitioner's business would 
handle five average-sized tourism projects a year, the study estimates that, after five operating years, 
the projects would have a total annual economic impact - including not only tourists' direct spending 
but also indirect and induced impacts - of $254. 7 million, with the creation of 978 permanent jobs. A 
letter from the principal of the firm that prepared the study states: "[C]onsulting firms with expertise 
in hospitality and rural development can play an important role in fostering economic growth and 
employment generation in rural communities." 
The study, however, does not demonstrate that the Petitioner's proposed business would substantially 
affect the national economy. The evidence indicates that the projects would generate an economic 
impact of $254. 7 million a year. But the Petitioner provided information from the federal government 
indicating that - in 2019, before the COVID-19 pandemic - foreign tourism to the United States 
generated $640 million a day. See U.S. Int'l Trade Admin. (ITA), "Travel and Tourism," 
www.trade.gov/travel-tourism-industry. Thus, the study indicates that the Petitioner's business would 
3 
constitute only a tiny fraction of the U.S. tourism industry and the national economy. Also, the 
Petitioner has not provided sufficient economic or employment information about the areas where the 
projects would be located. He therefore has not demonstrated that the projects would help 
economically depressed areas. Further, the record does not establish that his consulting services would 
deserve credit for all the projects' purported economic benefits. 
The Petitioner argues that his proposed endeavor aligns with U.S. tourism goals. In 2019, about 80 
million international visitors came to the United States, spending about $240 billion. U.S. Dep't of 
Commerce, ITA, ITA National Travel and Tourism Strategy 2022, 3, www.commerce.gov/sites/ 
default/files/2022-06/National-Travel-Tourism-Strategy.pdf. By 2027, the U.S. government seeks to 
attract 90 million international visitors a year, annually spending $279 billion. Id. at 5. 
The Petitioner also notes his submission of recommendation letters from executives and government 
officials in the business consulting and tourism industries. Two letters are from officials of an EB-5 
Regional Center, which develops projects for pooled foreign investments that can lead to immigrant 
visas for individual investors. See section 203(b)(5) of the Act (making visas available for immigrants 
engaging in "new commercial enterprises"). The Petitioner also submitted evidence that he has agreed 
to provide consulting services to the Regional Center. One of the center's letters states: 
[W]ithout the expert strategic consulting services of [the Petitioner], the successful 
development of Rural Tourism EB-5 projects for [the Regional Center] would be 
seriously jeopardized and the opportunity to bring economic growth and jobs to 
[targeted employment areas] could be lost. Rural Tourism is a niche industry, and the 
development of successful tourism projects requires a high degree of specialization and 
know-how which are not easy to find. 
The consulting agreement between the Petitioner and the Regional Center, however, postdates the 
petition's filing. A petitioner must establish eligibility "at the time of filing the benefit request." 
8 C.F .R. § 103 .2(b)(1 ). Thus, although the center letters may retain evidentiary value for other 
purposes, we cannot consider the Petitioner's proposed endeavor to include his consulting services to 
the center. 
The Petitioner's proposed venture has substantial merit. But we ultimately agree with the Director: 
The Petitioner has not demonstrated that his proposed business would potentially affect the economy 
or tourism industry at a nationally important level. The Petitioner's proposal resembles one that we 
considered in Dhanasar. There, the petitioner proposed teaching U.S. university students in science, 
technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) disciplines. Matter ofDhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 
893. We concluded that the proposed venture had substantial merit. Id. The proposal also aligned 
with U.S. government policy and initiatives. See generally 6 USCIS Policy Manual F.(5)(D)(2), 
www.uscis.gov/policy-manual (recognizing the importance of STEM knowledge to U.S. 
competitiveness and national security). But we found insufficient evidence of the endeavor's 
purported national importance because "the record does not indicate by a preponderance of the 
evidence that the petitioner would be engaged in activities that would impact the field of STEM 
education more broadly." Id. 
4 
Like the petitioner in Dhanasar, the Petitioner's proposed venture has substantial merit and aligns 
with government policy and initiatives. But, also like that petitioner, he has not sufficiently 
demonstrated that his proposed consultancy would affect the national economy or the U.S. tourism 
industry "more broadly." Because the Petitioner has not established that his proposed endeavor has 
national importance, we will affirm the petition's denial. 
E. Remaining Issues 
Our decision regarding the national importance of the Petitioner's proposed venture resolves this 
appeal. Thus, we decline to reach and hereby reserve consideration of his appellate arguments about 
his positioning to advance the venture and a waiver's benefits to the United States. See INS v. 
Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. 24, 25 (1976) (stating that agencies need not make "purely advisory findings" 
on issues unnecessary to their ultimate decisions); see also Matter of L-A-C-, 26 I&N Dec. 516, 526 
n.7 (BIA 2015) ( declining to reach alternate appellate issues where a noncitizen did not otherwise 
qualify for relief). 
III. CONCLUSION 
The Petitioner has not demonstrated that his proposed endeavor has national importance. Thus, under 
our framework, he does not qualify for a national interest waiver. We will therefore affirm the 
petition's denial for lack of a job offer and labor certification. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
5