remanded EB-2 NIW Case: Pharmacy

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 19804780 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: APR. 18, 2022 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker (Advanced Degree, Exceptional Ability, National 
Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, a pharmacist, 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 Texas Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the Petitioner qualified 
for classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree but that the Petitioner 
had not established 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. 
In these proceedings, it is the Petitioner's burden to establish eligibility for the requested benefit 
Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361. Upon de nova review , we will remand the matter to the 
Director for further consideration and 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 November 5, 2020. While the 
Director acknowledged that the Petitioner submitted a timely response to the RFE, the Petitioner's 
original response has not been incorporated into the record of proceeding. 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 
197 6). Accordingly, we will withdraw the Director's decision and remand this matter for the inclusion 
of the missing record materials and further consideration. 
Upon remand, the Petitioner should have the opportunity to supplement the record . In addition, we 
note that the Petitioner bas submitted a brief on appeal which may be relevant to her eligibility as of 
the date of filing. The Director is the more appropriate party to consider the impact of the appeal brief 
on the Petitioner's eligibility, as we cannot adjudicate the appeal based on the incomplete record. 
The Director should issue a new decision based on a review of the complete record, including the brief 
submitted on appeal. In doing so, the Director should ensure that the Petitioner's complete RFE 
response is in the record. Further, the Director should consider whether the Petitioner has established 
eligibility at the time of filing. 8 C.F.R. § 103 .2(b )(1 ). 
ORDER: The decision of the Director is withdrawn. The matter is remanded for the entry of a 
new decision consistent with the foregoing analysis. 
2