dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Unknown

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: JAN. 23, 2025 In Re: 36192124 
Motion on Administrative Appeals Office Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner seeks employment-based second preference (EB-2) immigrant classification as either 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 Texas Service Center denied the petition, concluding the Petitioner did not 
establish that a waiver of the required job offer, and thus of the labor certification, would be in the 
national interest. The Petitioner filed an appeal, which we rejected as untimely filed. We then 
dismissed a subsequent combined motion to reopen and reconsider as untimely filed. We dismissed a 
second combined motion to reopen and reconsider because we determined we lacked jurisdiction over 
the Petitioner's motions. 
The matter is before us again on a third combined motion to reopen and reconsider. The Petitioner 
bears the burden of proof to demonstrate eligibility by a preponderance of the evidence. Matter of 
Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369, 375-76 (AAO 2010). Upon review, we will dismiss the combined 
motion. 
A motion to reopen must state new facts and be supported by documentary evidence. 8 C.F.R. 
§ 103.5(a)(2). A motion to reconsider must establish that our prior decision was based on an incorrect 
application of law or policy and that the decision was incorrect based on the evidence in the record of 
proceedings at the time of the decision. 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(3). A motion that does not satisfy the 
applicable requirements must be dismissed. 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(4). 
By regulation, the scope of a motion is limited to review of "the prior decision." 8 C.F.R. 
§ 103.5(a)(l)(i). General support that a motion must first overcome the most recent decision lies 
within the regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(l)-(3), which discusses the underlying or latest decision, 
the time limits one has to file a motion after that decision, and the jurisdiction resting with the entity 
who made the latest decision. Any motion must first address and overcome the most recent adverse 
decision before the filing party's arguments may move on to any issue that arose in a previous petition, 
appeal, or motion filing. 
The matter to be overcome within this motion is limited to the issue discussed in our most recent 
decision; as described above, we dismissed the Petitioner's second combined motion to reopen and 
reconsider, concluding that we did not have jurisdiction over the Petitioner's motions. On appeal, the 
Petitioner submits evidence previously submitted and reasserts her eligibility for a national interest 
waiver. The Petitioner does not, however, provide new facts or documentary evidence relevant to our 
lack of jurisdiction over her motions, nor does she question the factual or legal correctness of our 
decision to dismiss based on our lack of jurisdiction. 
We must dismiss motions that do not meet applicable requirements. 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(4). We will, 
therefore, dismiss the Petitioner's motions. 
ORDER: The motion to reopen is dismissed. 
FURTHER ORDER: The motion to reconsider is dismissed. 
2