dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Transportation Engineering

identifying data deleted to 
prevent clearly unwarranted 
invasion of personal privac:y 
PUBLIC COpy 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services 
Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) 
20 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., MS 2090 
Washington, DC 20529-2090 
U. S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
DATE: JUN· 2 0 2011 OFFICE: NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER 
INRE: 
PETITION: 
Petitioner: 
Beneficiary: 
Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker as a Member of the Professions Holding an Advanced 
Degree or an Alien of Exceptional Ability Pursuant to Section 203(b)(2) of the Immigration 
and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.c. § 1153(b)(2) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
INSTRUCTIONS: 
Enclosed please find the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office in your case. All of the documents 
related to this matter have been returned to the office that originally decided your case. Please be advised that 
any further inquiry that you might have concerning your case must be made to that office. 
If you believe the law was inappropriately applied by us in reaching our decision, or you have additional 
information that you wish to have considered, you may file a motion to reconsider or a motion to reopen. The 
specific requirements for filing such a request can be found at 8 C.F .R. § 103.5. All motions must be 
submitted to the office that originally decided your case by filing a Form I-290B, Notice of Appeal or Motion, 
with a fee of $630. Please be aware that 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(1)(i) requires that any motion must be filed 
within 30 days of the decision that the motion seeks to reconsider or reopen. 
Thank you, 
Perry Rhew 
Chief, Administrative Appeals Office 
www.uscis.gov 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The Director, Nebraska Service Center, denied the employment-based immigrant visa 
petition. The matter is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The AAO will 
dismiss the appeal. 
The petitioner seeks classification pursuant to section 203(b)(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act 
(the Act), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(2), as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree. The 
petitioner seeks employment as a transportation engineer for the California Department of 
Transportation (Caltrans), San Diego. The petitioner asserts that an exemption from the requirement of 
ajob offer, and thus ofa labor certification, is in the national interest of the United States. The director 
found that the petitioner qualifies for classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced 
degree, but that the petitioner has not established that an exemption from the requirement of a job offer 
would be in the national interest of the United States. 
On appeal, the petitioner submits witness letters and technical materials. 
Section 203(b) of the Act states, in pertinent part: 
(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 of Job Offer-
(i) ... the 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. 
The director did not dispute that the petitioner qualifies as a member of the professions holding an 
advanced degree. The sole issue in contention is whether the petitioner has established that a waiver of 
the job offer requirement, and thus a labor certification, is in the national interest. 
Neither the statute nor the pertinent regulations define the term "national interest." Additionally, 
Congress did not provide a specific definition of "in the national interest." The Committee on the 
Judiciary merely noted in its report to the Senate that the committee had "focused on national interest by 
increasing the number and proportion of visas for immigrants who would benefit the United States 
economically and otherwise .... " S. Rep. No. 55, 101st Cong., 1st Sess., 11 (1989). 
Page 3 
Supplementary information to regulations implementing the Immigration Act of 1990 (IMMACT), 
published at 56 Fed. Reg. 60897, 60900 (November 29, 1991), states: 
The Service [now U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS)] believes it 
appropriate to leave the application of this test as flexible as possible, although clearly 
an alien seeking to meet the [national interest] standard must make a showing 
significantly above that necessary to prove the "prospective national benefit" 
[required of aliens seeking to qualify as "exceptional."] The burden will rest with the 
alien to establish that exemption from, or waiver of, the job offer will be in the 
national interest. Each case is to be judged on its own merits. 
Matter of New York State Dept. of Transportation, 22 I&N Dec. 215 (Commr. 1998), has set forth 
several factors which must be considered when evaluating a request for a national interest waiver. First, 
it must be shown that the alien seeks employment in an area of substantial intrinsic merit. Next, it must 
be shown that the proposed benefit will be national in scope. Finally, the petitioner seeking the waiver 
must establish that the alien will serve the national interest to a substantially greater degree than would 
an available U.S. worker having the same minimum qualifications. 
It must be noted that, while the national interest waiver hinges on prospective national benefit, it clearly 
must be established that the alien's past record justifies projections of future benefit to the national 
interest. The petitioner's subjective assurance that the alien will, in the future, serve the national interest 
cannot suffice to establish prospective national benefit. The inclusion of the term "prospective" is used 
here to require future contributions by the alien, rather than to facilitate the entry of an alien with no 
demonstrable prior achievements, and whose benefit to the national interest would thus be entirely 
speculative. 
The AAO also notes that the regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2) defines "exceptional ability" as "a 
degree of expertise significantly above that ordinarily encountered" in a given area of endeavor. By 
statute, aliens of exceptional ability are generally subject to the job offer/labor certification 
requirement; they are not exempt by virtue of their exceptional ability. Therefore, whether a given 
alien seeks classification as an alien of exceptional ability, or as a member of the professions holding 
an advanced degree, that alien cannot qualify for a waiver just by demonstrating a degree of 
expertise significantly above that ordinarily encountered in his or her field of expertise. 
The petitioner filed the Form 1-140 petition on February 23,2009. In an introductory statement, counsel 
stated that the petitioner "has received high praise for his innovative research, including election to the 
Mexican National System of Researchers, one of that country's highest honors .... We believe that [the 
evidence] speaks for itself and that [the petitioner's] skills, reputation and the related benefit to the 
United States are evident." 
The petitioner's curriculum vitae includes a description of his work at Caltrans: 
Page 4 
I am currently involved in activities of program and project management. In addition, I 
will be part of the team that will develop the risk management plan of Caltrans District 
11. Provided support to several project managers in developing working plans, resource 
assignment and planning, project monitoring and control, project estatus [sic] and 
project planning analysis together with risk analysis. Performed weaving analysis for an 
entire Corridor and worked as assistant construction engineer performing duties as 
inspector in construction sites. 
The petitioner submitted translated copies of his professional credentials and work 
articles and reports, and information regarding his book, 
••••••••• These materials demonstrate the petitioner's activity in his field, but they do not 
"speak for themselves" in terms of how the petitioner's work compares to that of other qualified 
engmeers. 
The petitioner submitted what counsel described as "[a]n explanation and analysis of [the petitioner's] 
use of artificial neural networks in risk management." This "explanation and analysis" is a translated 
fragment of a Spanish-language document, which appears to be a research proposal. One of the 
researchers named for the project is one of the petitioner's mentors. The document 
described research efforts in several countries, including the observation that one of the petitioner's 
works "demonstrates the use of an advance of an integral methodology for quantifying the cost of risks 
for infrastructure projects in Germany, while using artificial neural networks." The proposal indicated 
the researchers' intention to adapt the petitioner's processes, developed in Germany, to the conditions 
prevailing in Mexico. 
The petitioner also showed that he has served on juries considering the theses of engineering students at 
the Universidad de las Americas Puebla, while he was a lecturer at that university. Such work does not 
appear to be part of his current duties. The petitioner has not shown that it was out of the ordinary for a 
university lecturer to evaluate the work of students at that university. 
The petitioner submitted computer-translated background information about 
•• IIi •••••• from its Spanish initials), which "was created by Presidential Agreement ... to 
recognize the work of people engaged in producing scientific knowledge and technology. The 
recognition is awarded through the appraisal [of] peers and to confer the appointment of researchers. 
This distinction symbolizes the quality and prestige of the scientific contributions." granted the 
petitioner "the title of National Researcher Candidate for the period dating from January 1 st, 2006 until 
December 31 st, 2008, in recognition [of] his capacity to work doing Scientific Research." 
Documentation shows thatillprovided "economic support" to the petitioner. Materials in the record 
are somewhat ambiguous, but appear to indicate that the beneficiary received this support not through 
independent nomination, but by applying for it. The record contains a copy of what appears to be a 
contract between the petitioner and SNI, but the petitioner did not submit a certified translation as 
required by the regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(3). The materials submitted do not support counsel's 
claim that SNI membership "is one of the highest scientific honors that can be obtained in Mexico." 
Page 5 
The petitioner submitted what counsel described as "[l]etters attesting to [the petitioner's] outstanding 
international reputation. One expresses a desire to continue to do research with [the petitioner]; the 
other includes information on his unique background." This wording implies that there are two letters, 
but there are four letters, from two witnesses. 
Three of the letters are from head of the Technische Universitat Dresden, 
Germany, and all date from several years before the petition's filing date. In a letter dated September 3, 
2004, stated that the petitioner "did research at my Institute . . . from June 2000 to 
November 2002. [During] this period, he worked as a doctorate student and supported me as a research 
assistant." In the remaining two (similarly worded but distinct) letters, both dated May 2, 2005, Prof. 
Schach stated: "Considering the experiences with [the petitioner] while he was doing his Doctorate 
work at my Institute, I am very interested in continuing joint research work and as well to develop 
further research projects in order to establish former results in practical applications." These letters 
from a former professor do not "attest[] to [the petitioner's] outstanding international reputation," either 
directly through their text or indirectly by implication. 
The petitioner submitted two of a November 1, 2008 letter from 
planning director who stated: 
[The petitioner] worked as a civil engineer within our company for several important 
and challenging construction projects .... 
I was amazed about the abilities of [the petitioner] for coordinating different 
construction teams and manag[ing] different staff levels at the office. He was all the 
time a very concrete person, highly motivated for decision-making .... 
[A]s an alumn[us] ofthe Instituto Tecnologico de Tijuana ... , he was distinguished for 
achieving two local first places in a National Scientific contest and he was recognized 
for his outstanding participation in two regional scientific contests. 
The petitioner has studied and worked in several different countries. This makes him well-traveled, but 
he does not enjoy an "international reputation" simply because he has mentors and former employers in 
more than one country. 
Five employees and officials of Caltrans District 11 provided letters as well. Project manager and 
design manager the petitioner's supervisor, stated: 
[The petitioner's] assistance has been instrumental to completing our freeway projects 
located in San Diego County, and critical to our efforts of improving the mobility in 
California. 
Our working engagement began in October 2006 and continued through November 
2007 during which time I personally supervised his engineering work on Interstate 5. 
Page 6 
His assignments have included work on the Interstate 5 (1-5) North Coast Corridor 
Project that proposes widening a 27-mile long segment of the existing 1-5 freeway in 
San Diego County. This Project has been designated as a high priority project under the 
United States President's Executive Order (E.O. 13274) for Environmental Stewardship 
and Transportation Infrastructure Projects. [The petitioner's] work focused on complex 
Traffic Studies that have been paramount to the completion of the project Environmental 
Impact Statement. ... 
[The petitioner] has shown his engineering abilities and determination to support the 
transportation needs in California. 
Another project manager, described the petitioner's work on the 1-5 project in almost 
exactly the same words as ••••• used, and added: 
[The petitioner's] strong background in project and risk management, in addition [to] his 
international education and work experience; combine[ d] together with the know-how 
gained in Caltrans while rotating through the Divisions of Program Project 
Management, Design and Construction, made him a[ n] extremely valuable talent for 
improving Caltrans current practices in project management and project delivery. I am 
completely confident that [the petitioner] possesses the integrity and unique knowledge 
and skills that are critical for improving the management and the execution of 
transportation projects in the United States. 
recommendations expressed by 
concur with the maximal 
.... The above Project 
Managers work directly under my direction." 
deputy district director of District 11 's construction division, offered general praise 
for the petitioner's "excellent technical knowledge and management skills, but more importantly his 
ability to communicate with staff [ at] various levels." 
District Director stated that the petitioner "has demonstrated incredible initiative 
and strong dedication. [The petitioner] has played a critical role in Caltrans as the expert on risk 
management. He has shown a high degree of integrity, commitment, teamwork, and innovation." 
The letters quoted above indicate that the petitioner is a valued Caltrans employee, but do not show that 
a waiver of the job offer requirement would be in the national interest. 
On June 26, 2009, the director instructed the petitioner to submit evidence regarding the petitioner's 
"accomplishments in the field" and "influence in the field of endeavor." The petitioner's response 
included letters from five more Caltrans officials (four of them in District 11). These individuals 
discussed the petitioner's appointment as Caltrans District 11 's risk management coordinator. 
Page 7 
The record shows that this appointment took place on March 2,2009, after the petition's February 23, 
2009 filing date. An applicant or petitioner must establish that he or she is eligible for the requested 
benefit at the time of filing the application or petition. 8 C.F.R. § 103 .2(b)(1). Therefore, subsequent 
events cannot cause a previously ineligible alien to become eligible after the filing date. See Matter of 
Katigbak, 14 I&N Dec. 45, 49 (Reg!. Commr. 1971). The AAO will consider information about the 
petitioner's contributions in the area of risk management, but any argument about the importance of the 
beneficiary's new position as risk management coordinator cannot show that the beneficiary was 
already eligible for the waiver before he was in that position . 
•••• , a senior transportation planner and project manager, stated: 
[The petitioner] is a critical member of our Caltrans team and particularly projects that I 
am responsible for delivering from their inception to construction completion. [The 
petitioner] was appointed to this position because of his specific accomplishments [in] 
the fields of Civil Engineering, Construction Management and Risk Management. ... 
[The petitioner's] influence in the field of risk management was first demonstrated when 
he was very active[ly] participating with the Caltrans Risk Management expert group 
statewide, even though he was considerably new to our organization. His input was key 
for upgrading Caltrans methodology for performing quantitative risk analysis. Through 
this group's effort [the petitioner] was a contributor to the statewide Caltrans Project 
Risk Management Handbook and the enhancement of the risk analysis process and its 
tools (software) for implementation. 
a project management professional, emphasized the growing importance of risk 
management in the engineering field, and stated: 
[The petitioner] is extremely qualified to provide the Department of Transportation 
with risk analysis/management skills and expertise that are in short supply in the 
project management community at this time. To deny the Department his expertise 
would leave a big void and one that would remain unfilled for quite some time. The 
duties and responsibilities for performing [the petitioner's] position demand unique 
abilities and we have found that they are substantially in greater extent in his skill set 
than the majority of his peers .... 
The results obtained so far ... have influenced the project management field in 
Caltrans significantly. Upper level executive management and mid-level 
management are all supporters and advocates for implementing further the risk 
analysis (quantitative methodology) approach to all relevant projects in Caltrans and 
to create a permanent position for risk management based on this approach. [The 
petitioner] is a key component towards these efforts. In addition, [the petitioner's] 
peers have been influenced by the implementation of risk management and its results, 
and several peers had already consulted him for further advice in the field. 
Page 8 
It is hard to imagine me finding someone internally (within the Department) who has 
or is his equal in technical expertise and knowledge. [The petitioner's] experience in 
the field of risk analysis research will keep the Department that we work for up to 
date and cutting edge . 
•••• l, deputy district director of program/project management, stated: 
The influence of [the petitioner] in the field of risk management was first noticed 
when he [was] singled out as the technical expert in a statewide Caltrans Risk 
Management team even though he was relatively new to the organization. As part of 
this process, he reviewed the Caltrans Project Risk Management Handbook. His 
input was instrumental in upgrading Caltrans' methodology for performing 
quantitative analysis such as the development of risk stochastic models for cost and 
time. 
_ deputy district director of administration, stated: "Part of my assignment is to make sure 
the Department hires the most qualified engineers to help in building the State of Federal [sic] 
infrastructure. [The petitioner] is of that selection process and has demonstrated his abilities 
throughout his career with us." like some other witnesses, asserts that no one else at 
Caltrans has the petitioner's skill set in risk management. The standard for the waiver, however, is 
not whether or not the employer already has someone on staff who could adequately replace the 
petitioner. Rather, the waiver concerns the job offer process, including alien employment 
certification. 
The only witness outside of Caltrans District 11 is 
region program/project management in Fresno. He stated: 
branch chief of central 
[The petitioner] and I met approximately 4 years ago as we were brought together, by 
nomination by several of our statewide districts, to serve on a task force to revamp 
our departmental Project Risk Management Handbook. We were part of a 7-member 
team and he represented the voice of the San Diego district of our Department. 
Through the numerous meetings that we held, it was evident that he was one of the 
most knowledgeable individuals on the subject of Risk Management. ... 
By the end of several months of collaboration the team had successfully produced a 
handbook that we can proudly call one of our best ever project management 
handbooks. This was the second edition of our Risk Management handbook, and it 
superseded the former version by leaps-and-bounds. 
Without a shadow of doubt it can be said, that the principles, procedures and best 
practices noted in the guide have saved the State millions of dollars. And without a 
-Page 9 
shadow of doubt I can confidently say that it was [the petitioner's] presence and 
active participation that made this product ... worth it[s] weight in gold. 
Witnesses have attested to the scarcity of workers with the petitioner's qualifications, which would 
appear to operate in the petitioner's favor in the alien employment certification process (which exists 
for the purpose of determining the availability of qualified workers). 
The witnesses are unanimous in stating that the petitioner is well qualified for what appears to be the 
newly-created position of risk management coordinator. The witnesses, however, did not explain 
how a waiver of the job offer requirement would be in the national interest (as opposed to the 
narrower interest of Caltrans). The petitioner has not shown the impact that his work has had outside 
of Caltrans. 
The petitioner submitted documentation relating to several individual projects, but the petitioner has 
not explained how these technical materials demonstrate that the petitioner's past work has resulted 
in substantially greater cost savings than Caltrans would have seen from a different qualified worker 
in the same position. 
The director denied the petition on January 25, 2010, stating that the petitioner had not established 
that his work has had a significant impact outside of Caltrans, and that assertions of major cost 
savings were "not supported by verifiable evidence." On appeal, the petitioner submits copies of 
reports and other technical materials, many of which date from after the filing of the petition. The 
petitioner does not specifically explain the significance of these materials. 
The petitioner also submits several new witness letters. 
Tecnol6gico de Sonora, Mexico, states: 
coordinator at the Instituto 
[The petitioner's] knowledge in risk management has been of great influence in our 
academic programs. Including both; teaching at postgraduate levels and research in 
civil engineering with emphasis in construction and risk management. ... 
[The petitioner's] volunteer role with postgraduate lectures has been very successful. 
He started . . . two years ago supporting our Masters in Science in Construction 
Management with on-line and live classes, teaching topics [such] as planning and 
controlling construction projects, organization behavior in construction and risk 
management for construction projects. His contribution has been fundamental to gain 
more respect within the civil engineering society in Sonora and in addition, he has 
been the main reason of many students willing to enroll [in] our master program. 
The above letter emphasizes the local impact and benefit that the petitioner's work has had (by his 
direct involvement, the petitioner has enhanced the prestige of one university's construction 
management program). 
Page 10 
a doctoral student in Munich, Germany, who met the petitioner when 
they were both studying in Dresden, states that the petitioner's "Neuronal Risk Assessment System" 
"has several researchers awaken [sic] here in Germany, and it can be found in several Master Thesis 
and Doctoral Works." The petitioner submits no objective evidence to show the extent to which his 
system is in practical use, and no citation data to show the extent to which fully qualified, working 
engineers (as opposed to graduate students) rely on his published work. 
In a letter dated March 8, 2010, 
Munchen states: 
of the Universitat der Bundeswehr 
I have been in contact with [the petitioner] for more than two years, through the 
personal contact of one of my researchers .... 
The importance and development of his new Risk Analysis Method represents a 
milestone for further improvement and research in the field of risk management, with 
special interest in the analysis and quantification of risks in economic terms, which is 
a very difficult topic for quantifying the risks and chances. 
The [petitioner's] methods represent the state of the art of risk analysis techniques; 
the utilization of Artificial Neural Networks (ANN) is a new point of view and 
methodology to forecast risk [that] has revolutionized the way of analyzing risks. 
Nowadays, ANN's represents [sic] a new standard for performing risk management. 
Risk management is nowadays one of the most important tasks in the development of 
a construction project and the pedestal of project management. [The petitioner's] 
vision for proposing a new system and technique for dealing with uncertainties in 
construction projects has become one of the most promising techniques to deal with 
risks not only in Germany but over the world; as a consequence several researchers 
recognize the potential of the technique. 
With my practical and academic experience, I have to recognize that [the petitioner's] 
contribution in the field of risk management in construction projects has been 
outstanding. His book, Neuronal Risk Assessment System for Construction Projects, 
has become an obligated [sic] literature to any risk manager, to define the current 
state of [the] arts. 
A new letter from dated March 23, 2010, contains language that is very 
similar, at times identical, to much of letter, including the same grammatical 
anomalies (such as "ANN's represents"). Both of these letters contain the claim that the petitioner's 
book is widely used and influential, but the record contains no independent evidence to support that 
claim. For instance, the petitioner has not documented significant independent citation of the book, 
or established its use at institutions where the petitioner has neither worked nor studied. Instead, the 
petitioner has only submitted praise from close collaborators. 
Page 11 
Caltrans's risk management coordinator for the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge 
(SFOBB), states: 
I have the pleasure of working together with [ the petitioner] in the area of risk 
management and its application on Caltrans statewide efforts as well as the SFOBB 
project. [The petitioner's] publication entitled "Neuronal Risk Assessment System 
for Construction Projects" has been an influence on the field of risk management by 
providing enhanced techniques to quantify the cost of risks involved in construction 
projects, such as the SFOBB project. 
... [The petitioner's] permanence is crucial for helping Caltrans in achieving its goals 
of project delivery and for improving Caltrans' current practices for project risk 
cost/schedule analysis. 
In his second letter in support of the petition, states: 
Quantitative risk analysis/management skills and expertise are III short supply 
amongst the nation's project management community at this time. To deny the 
Department [the petitioner's] expertise would leave a big void and one that would 
remain unfilled for quite some time. The duties and responsibilities for performing 
[the petitioner's] position demand unique abilities and we have found that they are 
substantially in greater extent in his skill set than the majority of his peers .... 
The advanced (PhD level) technical expertise and knowledge of [the petitioner] 
cannot be covered by another competent, available and qualified U.S. worker in 
Caltrans and most certainly not on the staff at San Diego, California. 
The above arguments previous letter, asserting that no current Caltrans employee 
is available with the petitioner's skill set. The alien employment certification process, however, 
does not compare an alien to the alien's current co-workers. Rather, the process determines whether 
qualified United States workers are available to fill a given position. A lack of qualified workers, 
such as emphatically claims, favors approval of the certification. The petitioner 
cannot sidestep the process simply by declaring the unavailability of qualified workers. See Matter 
of New York State Dept. of Transportation, 22 I&N Dec. 222. 
As an example of the petitioner's work, discussed the "rehabilitation and retrofit of 
the Laurel ST OC Bridge over State Route 163," a historic landmark built in 1915: 
[The petitioner's] involvement led to an immediate project cost savings of $265,000. 
If you extrapolate the cost savings realized through [the petitioner's] efforts on this 
project over the total number of District projects that have a budget of over 
$25,000,000 in just this fiscal year (11 of 26 total projects,) it is easy to see the 
potential for savings of approximately $3,000.000 .... 
Page 12 
The results obtained so far due to [the petitioner's] efforts (risk registers, risk cost 
analysis reports, the Risk Management Information System) have been invaluable for 
the preservation of the structure but also in terms of their importance for helping the 
Department to save hundreds of thousands of dollars and potentially millions of 
dollars through the use of newly integrated qualitative methods of risk assessment. 
The Cost Risk Analysis Report for the one project described above generated by [the 
petitioner] show[s] that in terms of quantified risks the project would save about 
$9,000,000 by choosing one alternative over another. 
The petitioner identified no evidence in the record to support claims, or his 
assumptions (such as the apparent assumption that the risk management savings would amount to the 
same proportion of every project's budget). 
_ signing a letter on behalf of Caltrans district director repeats the claim 
that "finding these kinds of experts . . . is very difficult," and states that Caltrans saves 
"approximately $474,660" each year by employing the petitioner directly rather than hiring an 
outside consultant. This argument rests on the presumption that the denial of the waiver would 
inevitably force the petitioner's dismissal from Caltrans, but the petitioner has not explained why 
this would be the case. 
director of project risk management at 
California, has "worked professionally with [the petitioner] for over three years," having met the 
petitioner "through my client at the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans)." • 
_states that he and the petitioner have collaborated for "[a]bout a year. ... We have 
succeeded in rolling out project risk management in the District and in obtaining the buy-in and 
support of project managers." offered few details about the petitioner's work apart 
from praising "his innovative work in applying artificial intelligence concepts to construction 
management. " 
The opinions of experts in the field are not without weight and the AAO has considered them above. 
USCIS may, in its discretion, use as advisory opinions statements submitted as expert testimony. 
See Matter of Caron International, 19 I&N Dec. 791, 795 (Commr. 1988). However, USCIS is 
ultimately responsible for making the final determination regarding an alien's eligibility for the 
benefit sought. Id. The submission of letters from experts supporting the petition is not presumptive 
evidence of eligibility; USCIS may, as the AAO has done above, evaluate the content ofthose letters 
as to whether they support the alien's eligibility. See id. at 795. USCIS may even give less weight 
to an opinion that is not corroborated, in accord with other information or is in any way 
questionable. Id. at 795; see also Matter of Soffici, 22 I&N Dec. 158, 165 (Commr. 1998) (citing 
Matter of Treasure Craft of California, 14 I&N Dec. 190 (Regl. Commr. 1972». 
The letters considered above primarily contain bare assertions of widespread recogmtlOn and 
influence, without specific examples of how the petitioner's contributions have influenced the field 
Page 13 
beyond the specific institutions where he has worked and studied. The petitioner did not submit 
letters from independent references who affirm their own reliance on the beneficiary's work or who 
were even simply familiar with his work through his reputation. The petitioner also failed to submit 
specific corroborating evidence in existence prior to the preparation of the petition, which could 
have bolstered the weight of the reference letters. 
The record establishes that Caltrans considers the petitioner to be highly qualified for the position of 
risk management coordinator. The petitioner has not, however, submitted persuasive, objective 
evidence to show that a waiver of the job offer requirement is in the national interest (as opposed to 
the narrower interest of Caltrans). The petitioner has not demonstrated that his future work will be 
of direct, substantial benefit outside of Caltrans. Witness claims about the difficulty of locating 
qualified workers argue in favor of obtaining, rather than waiving, alien employment certification. 
As is clear from a plain reading of the statute, it was not the intent of Congress that every person 
qualified to engage in a profession in the United States should be exempt from the requirement of a job 
offer based on national interest. Likewise, it does not appear to have been the intent of Congress to 
grant national interest waivers on the basis of the overall importance of a given profession, rather than 
on the merits of the individual alien. On the basis of the evidence submitted, the petitioner has not 
established that a waiver of the requirement of an approved labor certification will be in the national 
interest of the United States. 
The burden of proof in these proceedings rests solely with the petitioner. Section 291 of the Act, 
8 U.S.C. § 1361. The petitioner has not sustained that burden. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.