remanded EB-2 NIW Case: Cardiology

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re : 11972513 
Appeal of Nebraska Service Center Decision 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date : MAY 14, 2021 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker (Advanced Degree, Exceptional Ability, National 
Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, an advanced cardiac imaging fellow , seeks second preference 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 EB -2 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 Petitioner qualified 
for classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree, but that she had not 
established that a waiver of the required job offer , and thus of the labor certification, would be in the 
national interest. 
On appeal , the Petitioner submits additional documentation and a brief asserting that she is eligible for 
a national interest waiver. 
In these proceedings, it is the petitioner's burden to establish eligibility for the immigration benefit 
sought. Section 291 of the Act , 8 U.S.C. § 1361. Upon de novo review, we will withdraw the 
Director's decision and remand the matter for further review of the record and issuance of a new 
decision. 
I. LAW 
To establish eligibility for a national interest waiver, a petitioner must first demonstrate qualification 
for the underlying EB-2 visa classification ( emphasis added), 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. 
Section 203(b) of the Act sets out this sequential framework: 
(2) Aliens who are members of the professions holding advanced degrees or aliens of 
exceptional ability. -
(A) In general. - Visas shall be made available ... to qualified immigrants who are 
members of the professions holding advanced degrees or their equivalent or 
who because of their exceptional ability in the sciences, arts, or business, will 
substantially benefit prospectively the national economy, cultural or 
educational interests, or welfare of the United States, and whose services in the 
sciences, arts, professions, or business are sought by an employer in the United 
States. 
(B) Waiver ofjob offer-
(i) National interest waiver. ... [T]he Attorney General may, when the Attorney 
General deems it to be in the national interest, waive the requirements of 
subparagraph (A) that an alien's services in the sciences, arts, professions, or 
business be sought by an employer in the United States. 
Section 10l(a)(32) of the Act provides that "[t]he term 'profession' shall include but not be limited to 
architects, engineers, lawyers, physicians, surgeons, and teachers in elementary or secondary schools, 
colleges, academics, or seminaries." 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2) contains the following relevant definition: 
Advanced degree means any United States academic or professional degree or a foreign 
equivalent degree above that of baccalaureate. A United States baccalaureate degree 
or a foreign equivalent degree followed by at least five years of progressive experience 
in the specialty shall be considered the equivalent of a master's degree. If a doctoral 
degree is customarily required by the specialty, the alien must have a United States 
doctorate or a foreign equivalent degree. 
Furthermore, while 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). 1 Dhanasar states that after a petitioner has 
established eligibility for EB-2 classification (emphasis added), U.S. Citizenship and Immigration 
Services (USCIS) may, as a matter of discretion,2 grant a national interest waiver if a petitioner 
demonstrates: ( 1) that the foreign national' s proposed endeavor has both substantial merit and national 
importance; (2) that the foreign national is well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor; and (3) 
1 In announcing this new framework. we vacated our prior precedent decision, Matter of New York State Department of 
Transportation. 22 l&N Dec. 215 (Act. Assoc. Comm'r 1998) (NYSDOT). 
2 See also Poursina v. USC1S. No. 17-16579, 2019 WL 4051593 (Aug. 28, 2019) (finding USCIS' decision to grant or 
deny a national interest waiver to be discretionary in nature). 
2 
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. 3 
II. ANALYSIS 
The Director found that the Petitioner qualifies as a member of the professions holding an advanced 
degree and we agree The remaining issue to be determined is whether the Petitioner has established that 
a waiver of the requirement of a job offer, and thus a labor certification, would be in the national 
interest. 
At the time of filing, the Petitioner was a third-year cardiology fellow. The Petitioner presented an 
offer froml IHospitall I School of Medicine for a one-year Advanced Cardiac Imaging 
Fellowship from July 1, 2019 through June 30, 2020, where she would "engage in supervised clinical 
work and research under al I State medical training license." 4 The Petitioner also provided a 
letter with her initial filing which discusses her "future research plans." She indicated that she intends 
"to continue to pursue clinical outcomes research in cardiology" and has "an interest in non-invasive 
cardiology, advanced heart failure and advanced cardiac imaging." The letter also explained that she 
"plan[s] to continue working in [her] field as a cardiologist with expertise in cardiac imaging." 
In this matter, we ultimately conclude that the Director's decision does not provide adequate analysis 
under the three prong Dhanasar framework. In addition, the limited discussion regarding national 
importance under the first prong is more appropriately addressed under the second prong ofDhanasar. 5 
To satisfy the national importance requirement, the Petitioner must demonstrate the "potential 
prospective impact" of her work. Here, the record includes information from the CDC regarding the 
costs of cardiovascular disease, letters of support discussing her proposed research, and documentation 
regarding the dissemination of her research to others. 6 The Director's decision, however, was limited 
to a short discussion of the Petitioner's record of citations, presentations, and peer-review. While we 
may agree with the Director's conclusion that the record does not establish "that her research has been 
frequently cited . . . or otherwise served as an impetus for progress in the field, that it has affected 
clinical practice, or that it has generated substantial positive discourse in the broader medical 
community," the first prong analysis focuses on the prospective ( emphasis added) impact of her 
research and not whether she is well positioned to advance the endeavor. 
3 See Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 888-91, for elaboration on these three prongs. 
4 As the Petitioner is applying for a waiver of the job offer requirement, it is not necessary for her to have a job offer from 
a specific employer. However, information about her current and prospective positions to illustrate the capacity in which 
she intends to work will be considered in order to determine whether her proposed endeavor meets the requirements of the 
Dhanasar analytical framework. 
5 As noted by the Petitioner. the decision is silent regarding the substantial merit element of the first prong analysis. 
6 With respect to the Petitioner's patient care duties at the hospitals where she intends to work, while these endeavors have 
substantial merit. the record does not establish that her clinical work would impact the field of cardiology or the U.S. 
healthcare industry more broadly, as opposed to being limited to the patients she serves. Accordingly, without sufficient 
documentary evidence of their broader impact, the Petitioner's clinical activities do not meet the "national importance" 
element of the first prong of the Dhanasar framework. Similarly, in Dhanasar, we determined that 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. 
3 
The second prong shifts the focus from the proposed endeavor to the Petitioner. As previously noted, 
the Petitioner's clinical work does not meet the national importance element of the first prong of the 
Dhanasar framework, and thus need not be discussed farther, However, the Petitioner's proposed 
research in cardiology may have broader implications for the field. The Director's analysis under this 
prong should focus on whether or not the Petitioner has established that she is well positioned to 
advance her proposed research, 7 and not be limited to a discussion of whether she was folly licensed 
to practice medicine at the time of filing. 
Finally, if the Petitioner establishes that she meets the first two prongs of the Dhanasar analysis, the 
Director should then determine whether, on balance, it would be beneficial to the United States to 
waive the requirements of a job offer and thus of a labor certification. 
For the reasons discussed above, we are remanding the petition. The Director may request any additional 
evidence considered pertinent to the new determination. 
ORDER: The matter is remanded for the entry of a new decision consistent with the foregoing 
analysis, which, if adverse, shall be certified to us for review. 
7 While we recognize that research must add information to the pool of knowledge in some way in order to be accepted for 
publication, presentation, funding, or academic credit, not every individual who has performed original research will be 
found to be well positioned to advance his or her proposed endeavor. Rather, we must examine the factors set forth in 
Dhanasar to detennine whether, for instance, the individual's progress towards achieving the goals of the proposed 
research, record of success in similar efforts, or generation of interest among relevant parties supports such a finding. Id. 
at 890. 
4