remanded EB-2 NIW Case: Boxing Coach

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: DEC. 06, 2023 In Re: 28538130 
Appeal of Nebraska Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, a boxing coach, seeks employment-based second preference (EB-2) immigrant 
classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree, 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 the record did not 
establish that the Petitioner merits, as a matter of discretion, a national interest waiver. 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 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 remand the matter for further consideration and the entry of a new decision. 
At this time, we are unable to address the merits of this case because the record is incomplete. The 
record reflects that the Director issued a request for evidence (RFE) on August 10, 2022. While the 
Director acknowledged in the underlying decision that the Petitioner submitted a timely response to 
the RFE, the Petitioner's original response has not been incorporated into the record ofproceeding. We 
cannot determine whether the Director considered the full RFE response, nor can we base our own 
decision in this case on an incomplete record. 
The Director bears the responsibility of ensuring that the record is complete and contains all evidence 
that has been submitted by a petitioner or considered by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services in 
reaching its decision. See 8 C .F.R. § 103.2(b)(l); cf. Matter of Gibson, 16 I&N Dec. 58, 59 (BIA 
1976). Accordingly, we will withdraw the Director's decision and remand this matter for the inclusion 
of the missing record materials and further consideration. 1 
1 The Director's decision did not consider the Petitioner's eligibility for the EB-2 immigrant classification as a member of 
the professions holding an advanced degree or an individual of exceptional ability. On remand, the Director should 
consider whether the Petitioner qualifies for the underlying classification and provide an analysis when issuing the new 
decision. 
ORDER: The Director's decision is withdrawn. The matter is remanded for the entry of a new 
decision consistent with the foregoing analysis. 
2