dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Transportation

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: DEC. 27, 2023 In Re: 28980890 
Appeal of Nebraska Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, an entrepreneur in transportation, seeks employment-based second preference (EB-2) 
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 classification. See Immigration 
and Nationality Act (the Act) section 203(b)(2), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(2). 
The Director of the Nebraska Service Center denied the petition, concluding that although the 
Petitioner qualifies for classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree, he 
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. 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 l&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. 
Once a petitioner demonstrates eligibility as either a member of the professions holding an advanced 
degree or an individual of exceptional ability, they must then establish that they merit a discretionary 
waiver of the job offer requirement "in the national interest." Section 203(b)(2)(B)(i) of the Act. 
While neither the statute nor the pertinent regulations define the term "national interest," Matter of 
Dhanasar, 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: 
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). 
• 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. 
II. ANALYSIS 
The issue to be addressed 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. The Director denied the 
petition, concluding that the Petitioner did not establish that: (1) his proposed endeavor met the 
standard for national importance, 2 (2) that he is well position to advance his endeavor, or (3) that on 
balance, waiving the job offer requirement would benefit the United States. 
For the reasons discussed below, we conclude that the Petitioner has not sufficiently demonstrated the 
national importance of his proposed endeavor under the first prong of the Dhanasar analytical 
framework. 
As previously stated, the first prong relates to substantial merit and national importance of the specific 
proposed endeavor. Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. Here, the petition lists "entrepreneur" as the 
Petitioner's job title and occupation. However, the initial supporting evidence did not include farther 
discussion or description of the proposed endeavor. The Director therefore issued a request for 
evidence instructing the Petitioner to provide a more detailed description of the proposed endeavor, 
explain why it has substantial merit, and submit documentary evidence showing that the endeavor has 
national importance. 
In response, the Petitioner stated that his endeavor is to be a business owner in the trucking industry. 
He pointed out that the trucking industry is important to the U.S. economy and stressed the industry's 
impact on manufacturing and retail. Further, he stated that his endeavor has national importance 
"because it will aid in the growth of other businesses" and help create U.S. jobs, enhance societal 
welfare, and is "directly related to a number of government initiatives, programs, and departments." 
The Petitioner also provided a share transfer agreement and share certificate showing his ownership 
interest inl las of February 15, 2022. We note that the affected party has the 
burden of proof to establish eligibility for the requested benefit at the time offiling the benefit request 
and continuing until the final adjudication. 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(l); see also Matter of Katigbak, 14 
I&N Dec. 45, 49 (Comm'r 1971) (providing that "Congress did not intend that a petition that was 
properly denied because the beneficiary was not at that time qualified be subsequently approved at a 
future date when the beneficiary may become qualified under a new set of facts."). Given that the 
documents establishing the Petitioner's ownership inl Iare dated February 15, 2022, 
it appears that he did not own the company as of November 2021, when this petition was filed. 3 As 
such, it is unclear whether the Petitioner's job title of "entrepreneur," as listed at the time of filing, 
2 The Director determined that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor has substantial merit. 
3 The Petitioner did not provide the company's formation documents and thus it is unclear when the company was 
established. 
2 
included owning and operating his own business, which he did not list as part of his employment 
history. 4 
Regardless, the Petitioner provide~ Ibusiness plan, which states that the company 
will provide "high-level truck transportation services to clients across the nation" and improve the 
quality of U.S. trucking services, thereby benefiting the entire trucking industry. Although the 
business plan states that the company will address the truck driver shortage by "integrat[ing] the 
widely ignored Uzbek truck driver employee market into the U.S. transportation network," it does not 
elaborate on how such integration will take place. 
Further, the Petitioner focuses heavily on the freight trucking industry's impact on the manufacturing 
and retail industries. However, 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. More specifically, "we look for broader implications" of the proposed endeavor, keeping in mind 
that an endeavor may have national importance "because it has national or even global implications 
within a particular field." Id. Here, the Petitioner does not adequately explain how his proposed 
endeavor of owning and operating a freight trucking business has national importance. 
An endeavor can also be deemed as having national importance if it "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 this end, the Petitioner's business plan states that his company will generate tax revenue, 
projecting that revenue will steadily increase from $509,280 in the first year of operation to nearly $3 
million by the fifth year. However, the plan did not elaborate on those revenue projections or 
adequately explain how they were calculated. And although the business plan projects that the 
company will employ 14 people, including the Petitioner, by its fifth year of operation, the Petitioner 
did not, for example, show that such employment figures would utilize a significant population of 
workers in the area or that they would substantially impact job creation and economic growth, either 
regionally or nationally. 
The Petitioner also refers to his educational credentials and "professional experience" as a truck driver 
and "manager assistant" in a factor. However, the Petitioner's skills, expertise, abilities, and prior 
accomplishments 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 he proposes to undertake has national importance under Dhanasar' s first prong. 
Moreover, to evaluate whether the Petitioner's proposed endeavor satisfies the national importance 
requirement, we look to evidence documenting the "potential prospective impact" of his work. 
Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. Here, the Petitioner did not demonstrate how his proposed endeavor 
of owning and operating a freight trucking company stands to largely influence the field and rise to 
the level of national importance. In Dhanasar, we determined the petitioner's teaching activities did 
not rise to the level of having national importance because they would not impact his field more 
4 The Petitioner completed a Form ETA 750 Part B, Application for Alien Employment Certification, where he listed 
"transportational [sic] professional" and personal shopper as the two positions he previously held. 
3 
broadly. Id. at 893. Likewise, the record here does not show through supporting documentation how 
the Petitioner's business stands to sufficiently extend beyond its prospective clients, to impact the 
industry or the U.S. economy more broadly at a level commensurate with national importance. 
On appeal, the Petitioner points out that "[f]irst and foremost, the [t]rucking [i]ndustry plays a crucial 
role in the U.S. economy." As previously stated, however, in determining whether an endeavor has 
national importance, our focus is not on the industry of the endeavor, but rather on the endeavor itself 
See id. at 889. And although the Petitioner argues that his trucking company will result in job creation, 
as noted earlier, the record lacks sufficient evidence to establish that the endeavor would utilize a 
significant population of workers in the area or that the job creation would be substantial, resulting in 
economic growth, either regionally or nationally. 
Furthermore, the record does not show that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor stands to sufficiently 
extend beyond his employees and clientele to impact the freight trucking industry at a level that is 
commensurate with national importance. 
In sum, the documentation in the record does not establish the national importance of the Petitioner's 
proposed endeavor as required by the first prong of the Dhanasar precedent decision. As such, the 
Petitioner has not demonstrated eligibility for a national interest waiver and further analysis of his 
eligibility under the second and third prongs outlined in Dhanasar would serve no meaningful purpose. 5 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
5 See INS v. Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. 24, 25 (1976) (stating that agencies are not required to make "purely advisory findings" 
on issues that are unnecessary to the ultimate decision); see also Matter ofL-A-C-, 26 l&N Dec. 516,526 n.7 (BIA 2015) 
( declining to reach alternate issues on appeal where applicants do not otherwise meet their burden of proof). 
4