dismissed
EB-2 NIW
dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Veterinary Medicine
Decision Summary
The appeal was dismissed because the petitioner failed to demonstrate that their proposed endeavor of providing mobile veterinary services had national importance. While the AAO acknowledged the endeavor's substantial merit, it concluded the evidence did not show an impact beyond the local clients the petitioner would serve, falling short of the broader implications required for a national interest waiver.
Criteria Discussed
Substantial Merit And National Importance Well-Positioned To Advance The Proposed Endeavor Balance Of Factors Favors Waiver
Sign up free to download the original PDF
Downloaded the case? Use it in your next draft →View Full Decision Text
U.S. Citizenship
and Immigration
Services
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office
Date: JUL. 02, 2024 In Re: 31108968
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver)
The Petitioner, a veterinarian, seeks classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced
degree or, in the alternative, an individual of exceptional ability in the sciences, arts or business. See
Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 203(b)(2), 8 U.S.C. § l 153(b)(2). The Petitioner
also seeks a national interest waiver of the job offer requirement that is attached to this EB-2 immigrant
classification. See section 203(b)(2)(B)(i) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § l 153(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.
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. 537, 537 n.2 (AAO 2015). Upon de novo review,
we will dismiss the appeal.
I. LAW
To qualify for the underlying EB-2 visa classification, a petitioner must establish they are an advanced
degree professional or an individual of exceptional ability in the sciences, arts, or business. Section
203(b )(2)(A) of the Act.
An advanced degree is any U.S. academic or professional degree or a foreign equivalent degree above
that of a bachelor's degree. A U.S. 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).
Exceptional ability means a degree of expertise significantly above that ordinarily encountered in the
sciences, arts, or business. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2). A petitioner must initially submit documentation
that satisfies at least three of six categories of evidence. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(ii)(A)-(F). 1 Meeting
at least three criteria, however, does not, in and of itself, establish eligibility for this classification. 2 If
a petitioner does so, we will then conduct a final merits determination to decide whether the evidence
in its totality shows that they are recognized as having the requisite degree of expertise and will
substantially benefit the national economy, cultural or educational interests, or welfare of the United
States. Section 203(b )(2)(A) of the Act.
If a petitioner establishes eligibility for the underlying EB-2 classification, they must then demonstrate
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,3 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
• On balance, waiving the job offer requirement would benefit the United States.
Id.
II. ANALYSIS
The Director found that the Petitioner qualifies for classification as an immigrant classification as an
individual of exceptional ability. We agree with the Director that the Petitioner has demonstrated
categorical eligibility for classification as an employment based second preference permanent
immigrant albeit on a different basis. The Petitioner earned a "Titulo de Medica Veterinaria" from
in I
__ Brazil in 2006. The Educational Database for Global Education (EDGE), created by the
American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers (AACRAO), reflects that
professional "Titulo de Medica Veterinaria" educational credentials earned at accredited institutions
of higher education in Brazil are the single source equivalent to a first professional degree in veterinary
medicine in the United States. So the Petitioner's Brazilian "Titulo de Medica Veterinaria" is a foreign
equivalent degree to a U.S. bachelor's degree from an accredited U.S. institution of higher education.
In addition, the Petitioner provides letters from her former employers, ________
I I and I I indicating that she has at least five years of progressive post
baccalaureate experience in her specialty equivalent to an advanced degree under the regulation at
8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(i)(B).
1 If these types of evidence do not readily apply to the individual's occupation, a petitioner may submit comparable
evidence to establish their eligibility. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(iii).
2 USCIS has previously confirmed the applicability of this two-part adjudicative approach in the context of aliens of
exceptional ability. 6 USCIS Policy Manual F.5(B)(2), https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual/volume-6-part-f-chapter-5.
3 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 is discretionary
in nature).
2
The remaining issue to be determined is whether the Petitioner has established eligibility for a national
interest waiver under the Dhanasar framework. While we do not discuss each piece of evidence, we
have reviewed and considered each one.
The first prong, 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.
The Petitioner's proposed endeavor is opening a company that will provide mobile veterinary medical
services, both routine and emergency care, for small animals. The Petitioner will serve as the general
manager and head veterinarian. The company will offer a wide range of medical services, such as
client consultations, animal treatment, emergency care, animal vaccination, medical exams, and
sample collections. The company will serve ________ counties in Florida, targeting
individuals who work long or odd hours, are homebound due to age, disability, or injury, have multiple
pets, or have anxious pets not used to leaving their homes. The Petitioners contends that her company
will provide accessible and affordable veterinary services, address the shortage of veterinarians, create
jobs, and boost the local economy.
The Director concluded the record did not establish that the proposed endeavor has national
importance. On appeal, the Petitioner submits a brief which generally reiterates the benefits of her
profession and her qualifications and contends that she has established the national importance of her
proposed endeavor. 4
In determining national importance under Dhanasar, the relevant question is not the importance of the
field, 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. In
Dhanasar, we further 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. The broader implications of the proposed endeavor, national
and/or international, can inform us of the proposed endeavor's national importance. That is not to say
that the implications are viewed solely through a geographical lens. Broader implications can reach
beyond a particular proposed endeavor's geographical locus and focus. The relevant inquiry is
whether the broader implications apply beyond just narrowly conferring the proposed endeavor's
benefit. And 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.
Moreover, to evaluate whether the Petitioner's proposed endeavor satisfies the national importance
requirement, we look to evidence documenting the "potential prospective impact" of her work. In
4 The record supports that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor, which aims to address the health and well-being of animals,
has substantial merit. The Petitioner provided information that there is a demand for the profession of veterinarians in the
United States. We conclude that the record shows the Petitioner's proposed endeavor has substantial merit.
3
I
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 broadly. Id. at 893. We recognize the
overall value of the veterinary medicine industry and strengthening our nation's veterinary services.
However, the evidence does not demonstrate that the Petitioner's specific undertaking stands to have
an impact beyond the organization and clients she would serve, or that her proposed work would
otherwise have broader implications for the veterinary medicine industry or initiatives. For example,
she does not claim, and the record does not establish, that her plans to introduce novel methodologies
or medical advancements that may be disseminated to or adopted by others operating in the field or
industry, or otherwise articulate how she will contribute to research and development of our nation's
veterinary medicine. Here, the record does not show through supporting documentation how her
specific company that provides mobile veterinary services stands to sufficiently extend beyond her
prospective clients to impact the industry or the U.S. economy more broadly at a level commensurate
with national importance. Although the Petitioner contends that her business will generate revenue
and create employment opportunities, this does not rise to the level of national importance.
The evidence and argument the Petitioner introduced into the record does not help her carry her
burdens of production and persuasion. In support of her claim that she can satisfy the first prong of
the Dhanasar analytical framework, the Petitioner provided her professional plan, her academic
credentials, letters of recommendation, records of her achievements, and a business plan for her
proposed company, IThe Petitioner also submitted an expert opinion letter from Dr.
I a licensed veterinarian. 5 The letters of recommendation containing testimonials of the
services the Petitioner performed do not describe how the benefits they have received connect to
broader implications rising to national importance or any nationally important economic impact.
USCIS may, in its discretion, use as advisory opinion statements from universities, professional
organizations, or other sources submitted in evidence as expert testimony. See Matter ofCaron Int ·z,
19 I&N Dec. 791, 795 (Comm'r 1988). However, the submission ofletters from experts supporting a
petition is not presumptive evidence of eligibility. Id. Much of the expert opinion letter's content
lacks relevance when it comes to the evaluation of whether the Petitioner's work rises to the level of
national importance. For example, the writer identifies a shortage of veterinarians and professionals
who provide veterinary services but did not explain how the Petitioner's work would alleviate those
shortages at a national level. In any event, labor shortages are better addressed by the labor
certification process, which requires a petitioner to undertake a labor market test to evaluate whether
there are sufficient able, willing, qualified and available U.S. workers for the job opportunity. The
national interest waiver process is a discretionary waiver of the labor certification to address those
endeavors performed by foreign nationals rising to a level of concern with implications to the national
interest.
It is also unclear from the evidence in the record whether the work of a single veterinarian or one clinic
providing veterinary services, irrespective of its success or failure, would have a significant impact on
the field beyond its immediate sphere of influence. The evidence in the record does not highlight how
the prospective potential impact of the work of one professional or group of professionals m a
veterinary clinic could have broader implications implicating the national interest.
5 While we may not discuss every document submitted, we have reviewed and considered each one.
4
The Petitioner tries to highlight the broader implications of their endeavor by linking it to the ubiquity
of pet ownership across the United States as a whole. But, as we stated earlier, we do not view the
broader implications of a proposed endeavor solely through a geographical lens. Whilst the health
and welfare of pets and by extension their owners holds merit, the record does not sufficiently describe
how the "ripple effects" of the accurate diagnosis of maladies in pets implicate the greater national
interest. The provision of veterinary services directly benefits only those individuals with pets availing
themselves of the Petitioner's services. This is akin to how the benefit of someone's teaching is
generally only directly beneficial to the students being taught and not the wider population. In
Dhanasar we discussed how teaching would not impact the field of education broadly in a manner
rising to national importance. Dhanasar at 893. By extension activities which only benefit a small
subset of individuals and their pets, like the Petitioner's proposed mobile veterinary clinic, would not
rise to a level of national importance.
Further, the Petitioner has not demonstrated that the specific endeavor she proposes to undertake has
significant potential to employ U.S. workers or otherwise offers substantial positive economic effects
for our nation. We reviewed the Petitioner's business plan. The business plan makes various
projections that the company will purportedly achieve in five years, such as increasing the sales
forecast from $466,650 in year one to $2,056,685 by year five and providing a total payroll of
$1,401,500 by hiring 23 employees. However, the plan does not provide sufficient detail of the basis
for these projections, or adequately explain how these sales and staffing targets will be realized. The
Petitioner must support her assertions with relevant, probative, and credible evidence. See Matter of
Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. at 376. In addition, the record does not indicate that the location of the
business and its proposed operations is an economically depressed area. Without sufficient evidence
regarding the projected U.S. economic impact or job creation directly attributable to her future work,
the record does not show that benefits to the regional or national economy resulting from the
Petitioner's endeavor would reach the level of "substantial positive economic effects" contemplated
by Dhanasar. Id. at 890. Accordingly, the Petitioner's proposed endeavor does not meet the first
prong of the Dhanasar framework.
The Petitioner has not established that the proposed endeavor has national importance, as required by
the first Dhanasar prong; therefore, she is not eligible for a national interest waiver. Because this
issue is dis positive of the Petitioner's appeal, we decline to reach and hereby reserve the remaining
arguments concerning eligibility under the remaining Dhanasar prongs. 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 I&N Dec. 516, 526n.7
(BIA 2015) (declining to reach alternate issues on appeal where an applicant is otherwise eligible).
III. CONCLUSION
As the Petitioner has not met the requisite first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework, we
conclude that she has not established her eligibility for a national interest waiver of the job offer
requirement, and thus of a labor certification. Accordingly, the appeal will be dismissed.
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.
5 Avoid the mistakes that led to this denial
MeritDraft learns from dismissed cases so your petition avoids the same pitfalls. Get arguments built on winning precedents.
Avoid This in My Petition →No credit card required. Generate your first petition draft in minutes.