dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Trucking And Logistics

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: JUN. 20, 2024 InRe : 31474305 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, a truck driver and shipping executive, seeks classification as a member of the 
professions holding an advanced degree or of exceptional ability, Immigration and Nationality Act 
(the Act) section 203(b)(2), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(2). The Petitioner also seeks a national interest waiver 
of the job offer requirement that is attached to this employment based second preference (EB-2) 
classification. See section 203(b)(2)(B)(i) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(2)(B)(i). U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration Services (USCIS) may grant this discretionary waiver of the required job offer, and 
thus of a labor certification, when it is in the national interest to do so. See Flores v. Garland, 72 F.4th 
85, 88 (5th Cir. 2023) (joining the Ninth, Eleventh, and D.C. Circuit Courts (and Third in an 
unpublished decision) in concluding that USCIS' decision to grant or deny a national interest waiver 
to be discretionary in nature). 
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. 53 7, 537 n.2 (AAO 2015). Upon de novo review, 
we will dismiss the appeal. 
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. 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. 
As 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 (AAO 2016). Dhanasar states that USCIS may as a matter of discretion 
grant a national interest waiver of the job offer, and thus of the labor certification, to a petitioner 
classified in the EB-2 category if they demonstrate that (1) the noncitizen's proposed endeavor has 
I 
both substantial merit and national importance, (2) the noncitizen 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. 
The first prong, substantial merit and national importance, focuses on the specific endeavor the 
noncitizen 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 noncitizen. To determine whether 
the noncitizen 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, progress towards achieving the proposed endeavor, and 
the interest of potential customers, users, investors, or other relevant entities or individuals are also 
key considerations. 
The third prong requires the petitioner to demonstrate that, on balance of applicable factors, it would 
be beneficial to the United States to waive the requirements of a job offer and thus of a labor 
certification. USCIS may evaluate factors such as whether, in light of the nature of the noncitizen' s 
qualification or the proposed endeavor, it would be impractical either for the noncitizen to secure a 
job offer or for the petition to obtain a labor certification; whether, even assuming that other qualified 
U.S. workers are available, the United States would still benefit from the noncitizen's contributions; 
and whether the national interest in the noncitizen's contributions is sufficiently urgent to warrant 
forgoing the labor certification process. Each of the factors 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. 
The Petitioner intends to offer transportation of bulk commodities serving a myriad of sectors all over 
the United States through his freight shipping company, I I The company will specialize 
in tank and refrigeration trucking by moving cargo that requires specialized equipment for 
transportation such as automobiles, gravel, sand, chemicals, frozen goods, livestock, milk, and 
petroleum. 
In response to the Director's request for evidence (RFE) regarding the proposed endeavor, the 
Petitioner submitted a contract for trucking services, the IRS Employer Identification Number for 
Iexpert opinion letters, the business plan, his tax returns, and articles on the trucking 
industry, among other documents. The Director determined that the Petitioner had established he 
qualified for the underlying EB-2 visa classification and that the proposed endeavor had substantial 
merit. However, the Director concluded that Petitioner had not established the national importance of 
the endeavor, the first prong in the Dhanasar analysis, because he had not shown how his endeavor 
would have a national impact. 
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. Although the Petitioner 
contends that his business plan and autobiographical statement discussed the importance of various 
2 
national and government initiatives regarding the critical need for truckers including the Biden-Harris 
Trucking Action Plan, the matter here is not whether these initiatives as well as transportation and 
trucking are nationally important. Rather, the Petitioner must demonstrate the national importance of 
the specific proposed endeavor of his Florida-based freight shipping company, I I His 
submission of numerous articles such as "Freight Trucking Market Size [2023-2030] Industry Growth, 
Share, and Trends Forecast Analysis" and "Trucking Criss Has the US. Looking for More Drivers 
Abroad" regarding the economic growth in the shipping industry and the shortage of truckers covers 
the transportation industry in general, rather than establishing the national importance of his particular 
professional services or business. In Dhanasar, we 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. Here, the Petitioner relies on the importance of the trucking 
industry in general, focusing on the critical role it plays in the U.S. supply chain and economy. As 
previously discussed, 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. 
The Petitioner submitted documentation evidencing the driver shortage in the freight trucking industry 
and contends that his proposed endeavor "includes ameliorating this shortage, as well as the creation 
of new jobs, creation of new enterprises, and meeting the demands of the population, commodity 
producers, and construction companies." However, the alleged shortage of occupations or 
occupational skills does not render his proposed endeavor nationally important under the Dhanasar 
framework. In fact, such shortages of qualified workers are directly addressed by the U.S. Department 
of Labor through the labor certification process. 
Moreover, the Petitioner stresses his "expertise, experience, and skills." However, the Petitioner's 
knowledge, skills, and abilities 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 that he proposes to undertake has national importance under Dhanasar 's first 
prong. 1 
While he provided a business plan for the proposed company, the Petitioner presented insufficient 
supporting evidence to corroborate the assertions in the plan. Although the Petitioner's taxes, 
independent contractor agreement with and the EIN for I !indicate 
he has established a business that is increasing in profit, the record lacks evidence detailing how the 
Petitioner will continue to expand operations. Moreover, the Petitioner did not demonstrate how the 
business plan's claimed revenue and employment projections, even if credible or plausible, have 
significant potential to employ U.S. workers or otherwise offers substantial positive economic effects 
for our nation. Although the business plan forecasts revenue from $727K in year 1 to over $6M in 
year 5, the Petitioner did not establish the significance of this data to show that the benefits to the 
regional or national economy would reach the level of "substantial positive economic effects" 
1 The Petitioner's arguments and evidence relate to the substantial merit aspect of the proposed endeavor rather than the 
national importance part. 
3 
contemplated by Dhanasar. Id. at 890. Similarly, even though the business plan claims the creation 
of 20 jobs, the Petitioner did not demonstrate the relevance of these numbers and show that such future 
staffing levels would provide substantial economic benefits to the I I Florida region or the U.S. 
economy more broadly at a level commensurate with national importance. The Petitioner, for instance, 
did not establish that such employment figures would utilize a significant population of workers in the 
area or would substantially impact job creation and economic growth, either regionally or nationally. 
For all these reasons, the record does not demonstrate that, beyond the limited benefits provided to its 
prospective clients and employees, the Petitioner's proposed endeavor has broader implications rising 
to the level of having national importance or that it would offer substantial positive economic effects. 
Because the documentation in the record does not establish the national importance of the 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 ofthe Petitioner's eligibility under 
the second and third prongs outlined in Dhanasar, therefore, would serve no meaningful purpose. 2 
As the Petitioner has not met the requisite first prong ofthe Dhanasar analytical framework, we conclude 
the Petitioner has not demonstrated eligibility 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. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
2 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