remanded EB-2 NIW Case: Psychology

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 26269869 
Appeal of Nebraska Service Center Decision 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date : MAR . 31, 2023 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, a psychologist and therapist, seeks employment-based second preference (EB-2) 
immigrant classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree or as an 
individual of exceptional ability, 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 revoked the approval of the petition without issuing a 
notice of intent to revoke (NOIR), concluding that the petition was approved in error because the 
Petitioner did not submit either a Form ETA 750B or Form ETA 9089. 1 The matter is now before us 
on appeal. 8 C.F.R. § 103.3. 
On appeal, the Petitioner submits a completed Form ETA 750B, Statement of Qualifications of Alien, 
along with copies of previously submitted evidence. He emphasizes that he already established that 
he is exempt from the job offer requirement for the EB-2 classification based on his "studies, research 
and work experience" and requests that the revocation decision be overturned. 
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). We review the questions in this matter 
de novo. Matter of Christo 's, Inc., 26 l&N Dec. 537, 537 n.2 (AAO 2015). Upon de novo review, 
we conclude that the Petitioner's submission of the Form ETA 750B overcomes the Director's sole 
basis for revocation. However, the record as presently constituted does not establish the Petitioner's 
eligibility for a national interest waiver of the job offer requirement. Accordingly , we will withdraw 
the Director's decision and remand the matter for further consideration and entry of a new decision 
consistent with the following analysis. 
1 The regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(4)(ii) states, in pertinent part, "[t]o apply for the [national interest] exemption the 
petitioner must submit Form ETA 750B, Statement of Qualifications of Alien, in duplicate." Alternative ly, U.S. 
Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) will accept parts J, K, and L of Form ETA 9089, Application for Permanent 
Employment Certification. See 6 USCIS Policy Manual F.S(D), https://www.uscis .gov/policy-manual/volume-6-part-f­
chapter-5 . 
I. LAW 
To establish eligibility for a national interest waiver, a petitioner must first demonstrate qualification 
for the underlying EB-2 visa classification, as either an advanced degree professional or an individual 
of exceptional ability in the sciences, arts, or business. Section 203(b)(2)(B)(i) of the Act. If a 
petitioner demonstrates eligibility for the underlying EB-2 classification, they must then establish 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 2, 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. 
At any time before a beneficiary or self-petitioner obtains lawful permanent residence, however, 
USCIS may revoke a petition's approval for "good and sufficient cause." Section 205 of the Act, 8 
U.S.C. § 1155. If supported by the record, a petition's erroneous approval may justify its revocation. 
Matter of Ho, 19 I&N Dec. 582,590 (BIA 1988). 
II. ANALYSIS 
In support of his EB-2 classification, the Petitioner submitted copies of his foreign educational 
credentials, professional certificates and recognitions, letters from two employers, his resume, and a 
copy of his doctoral thesis. Notably, the Petitioner provided evidence that he has a "master in 
psychotherapy" from the Institute ofl I in Mexico. Having 
reviewed the information contained in the record and the Electronic Database for Global Education 
(EDGE) database, created by the American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions 
Officers (AACRAO), we find that the Petitioner's foreign education is equivalent to that of a 
professional holding an advanced degree pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(i)(A). The AACRAO 
EDGE database is a reliable resource concerning the U.S. equivalencies of foreign education. See 
generally American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers, Electronic 
Database for Global Education, https://www.aacrao.org/edge. He therefore qualifies for the 
underlying EB-2 classification as an advanced degree professional. However, for the reasons 
discussed below, the record does not establish the Petitioner's eligibility for a national interest waiver 
of the job offer requirement. 
The Petitioner indicated on the Form 1-140 at Part 6, item 3, where asked to provide "basic information 
about the proposed employment," that he intends to work as a psychologist and therapist and will 
"provide counseling to all types of persons in a critical and emotive situation." He also states that he 
has previously "carried out research work on the behavior of people with addictions," and that he 
2 See also Poursina v. USCIS, 936 F.3d 868 (9th Cir. 2019) (finding USCIS' decision to grant or deny a national interest 
waiver to be discretionary in nature). 
2 
"started a systematic project to help addicted people." The record contains no further description of, 
or evidence related to, the Petitioner's proposed endeavor and no statements from the Petitioner that 
specifically address how the submitted evidence establishes his eligibility for a national interest waiver 
under the Dhanasar framework. For example, 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. Similarly, the record in this matter does not demonstrate 
that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor stands to sufficiently impact U.S. interests or the mental health 
field more broadly at a level commensurate with national importance. In addition, he has not 
demonstrated that his specific proposed endeavor has significant potential to employ U.S. workers or 
otherwise off er substantial positive economic effects for our nation. Therefore, we conclude that the 
record as presently constituted does not demonstrate that the Petitioner meets the requirements for a 
national interest waiver set forth in the Dhanasar precedent decision. 
Considering this deficiency, we will remand this matter for further consideration by the Director. On 
remand, the Director may issue a new NOIR pertaining to concerns regarding this or other issues as 
the Director deems appropriate. 
III. CONCLUSION 
The Petitioner has overcome the Director's sole basis for revocation; however, the record as presently 
constituted does not establish his eligibility for a national interest waiver of the job offer requirement 
under the Dhanasar framework. We are therefore remanding the matter for further consideration by 
the Director. The Director may issue a new NOIR and, following the Petitioner's response thereto or 
the expiration of the time period for response, issue a new decision. 
ORDER: The Director's decision is withdrawn. The matter is remanded for entry of a new 
decision consistent with the foregoing analysis. 
3