dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Trucking Industry

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: MAY 7, 2024 In Re: 30727889 
Appeal of Nebraska Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, an entrepreneur in the trucking industry, seeks employment-based second preference 
(EB-2) immigrant classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree or an 
individual of exceptional ability, 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 qualified as an advanced degree professional, he did not establish that a waiver of the 
required job offer, and thus of the labor certification, would be in the national interest. 1 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 l&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. 
If a petitioner demonstrates eligibility for the underlying EB-2 classification, 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 USCIS may, as 
matter of discretion, 2 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 An advanced degree is any United States academic or professional degree or a foreign equivalent degree above that of a 
bachelor's degree. A United States bachelor 's degree or foreign equivalent degree followed by five years of progressive 
experience in the specialty is the equivalent of a master's degree. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2). 
2 See also 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). 
• On balance, waiving the job offer requirement would benefit the United States. 
The Petitioner proposes to establish a trucking business in Ohio. The Petitioner states that his 
"business endeavor is to enhance the overall standard of trucking services in the United States by 
ensuring that all freight is safely stored and transported in a way that preserves its quality." The 
Petitioner indicated that he intended to expand his business across the United States and Canada. 
The Director determined that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor was of substantial merit, and we 
agree. However, the Director concluded that the Petitioner did not establish that his proposed endeavor 
had national importance. Specifically, the Director reviewed the business plan for the Petitioner's 
company and determined that its projections for revenue and job creation would not have the type of 
"substantial positive economic effects" that were noted in Dhanasar as positive factors in establishing 
the national importance of an endeavor. Id. at 890. The Director concluded that the Petitioner's 
proposed endeavor would not have broader implications within its field or otherwise be of national 
importance. 
On appeal, the Petitioner asserts that the evidence in the record demonstrates that his proposed 
endeavor has national importance. Specifically, the Petitioner contends that his business plan explains 
"exactly what the Petitioner's contributions will be or how the Petitioner's contributions will have a 
profound impact on the national level." The Petitioner further asserts that his proposed endeavor 
would have far-reaching impacts on the shortage of truckers in the United States, the economy 
generally, its supply chain, and aligns with key priorities centered around safeguarding national 
security. 
The first prong of the Dhanasar framework, substantial merit and national importance, focuses on the 
specific endeavor that the individual 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. Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. 
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. We further indicated 
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. 
We have reviewed the Petitioner's business plan and its projections that his proposed company will 
directly employ 50 employees within five years and, during that period, cumulatively pay wages of 
over $3.2 million and generate more than $3.5 million in revenue. The business plan uses a multiplier 
published by the Economy Policy Institute to show that it will generate 96 indirect jobs by the 
company's fifth year of operation. Importantly, these employment and revenue projections are not 
supported by details showing their basis. In addition, the record does not support that the direct 
creation of 50 additional jobs in this sector or the expected revenue generated by the company will 
2 
have a substantial economic benefit commensurate with the national importance element of the first 
prong of the Dhanasar framework. For instance, on appeal, the Petitioner states that on a 
"macroeconomic level" his venture would have "significant implications," noting that his proposed 
entrepreneurial endeavor "contributes to the nation's long-term economic health and stability," 
"reduces poverty rates," "enhances access to education and healthcare," and "fosters an environment 
conducive to innovation and progress." However, the Petitioner provides little explanation and 
supporting documentation to substantiate that his proposed trucking business would have a potential 
prospective national impact on the United States' long-term economic prospects, its poverty rates, 
education and healthcare, or innovation within the U.S. economy. Although the Petitioner asserts that 
his company will provide economic growth and his business plan shows his intention to expand his 
company, the record does not show that benefits to the U.S. regional or national economy resulting 
from the Petitioner's proposed endeavor would reach the level of "substantial positive economic 
effects" contemplated by Dhanasar. Id. 
The Petitioner also points to the COVID-19 pandemic on appeal asserting that this crisis "exposed 
vulnerabilities in the nation's supply chain," contending that his "focus on improving supply chain .. .is 
vital contribution to society" and have "far-reaching implications on societal welfare" ensuring "that 
critical goods, including medical supplies and food ... reach consumers reliably." However, again, the 
Petitioner did not sufficiently indicate or document how his proposed trucking company would have 
"far-reaching implications" on the U.S. supply chain such that this would have a potential prospective 
national impact on how critical goods are supplied within the country. 
In addition, the Petitioner points to the shortage of qualified truck drivers in the United States and that 
his endeavor aligns with the Interim National Security Strategic Guidance (INSSG). However, the 
national shortage of truck drivers is not, in and of itself sufficient to establish the national importance 
of the Petitioner's endeavor. 3 The Petitioner has not established how the creation of 20 new truck 
driving positions would resolve this shortage or impact it on a national level. Moreover, although the 
Petitioner asserts that his endeavor aligns with the INSSG, he does not sufficiently explain how his 
endeavor would safeguard national security and foster a prosperous and democratic society. In sum, 
the Petitioner has not established by a preponderance of the evidence the national importance of any 
impact his proposed endeavor would have. 
Moreover, the business plan highlights the Petitioner's over 20 years of experience as an entrepreneur. 
However, the Petitioner's expertise and record of success are considerations under Dhanasar' s second 
prong, which "shifts the focus from the proposed endeavor to the foreign national." Id. at 890. The 
issue here is whether the Petitioner has demonstrated, by a preponderance of the evidence, the national 
importance of his proposed work. 
While we may agree that the Petitioner's stated intentions are admirable, he has not offered sufficient 
information and evidence to demonstrate that the prospective impact of his proposed endeavor rises 
to the level of national importance. In Dhanasar, we determined that the petitioner's teaching 
activities did not rise to the level of national importance because they would not impact his field more 
3 We further note that the Department of Labor directly addresses U.S. worker shortages through the labor certification 
process. Therefore, a shortage of qualified workers in an occupation is not sufficient, in and of itself, to establish that 
workers in that occupation should receive a waiver of the job offer requirement. See Dhanasar, 26 l&N Dec. at 885; see 
also 20 C.F.R. § 656.1. 
3 
broadly . Id. at 893 . Here, we similarly conclude that the record does not show that the Petitioner's 
proposed endeavor stands to sufficiently extend beyond hi s own company and its clients to impact the 
industry more broadly at a level commensurate with national importance. Nor has he shown that the 
particular work he proposes to undertake offers original innovations that contribute to advancements 
in trucking or otherwise have broader implications for his field. 
Because the Petitioner has not established eligibility under the first prong of the Dhanasar test, we 
need not address his eligibility under the remaining prongs, and we hereby reserve them. 4 The burden 
of proof is on the Petitioner to establish that he meets each eligibility requirement of the benefit sought 
by a preponderance of the evidence . Matter of Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. at 375-376. The Petitioner 
has not done so here and, therefore , we conclude that he has not established eligibility for a national 
interest waiver as a matter of discretion. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
4 See INS v. Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. 24, 25 (1976) ("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 ofL-A-C-, 26 l&N Dec. 516, 526 n. 7 (BIA 
2015) ( declining to reach alternate issues on appeal where an applicant is otherwise ineligible). 
4