remanded EB-2 NIW Case: Research

U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
20 Mass. Ave., N.W., Rm. 3000 
Washington, DC 20529 
U. S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
B5 
FILE: Office: VERMONT SERVICE CENTER 
EAC 04 025 51 806 
JUL 18 2006 
PETITION: 
 Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker as a Member of the Professions Holding an Advanced 
Degree or an Alien of Exceptional Ability Pursuant to Section 203(b)(2) of the Immigration 
and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(2) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
SELF-REPRESENTED 
INSTRUCTIONS: 
This is the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office in your case. All documents have been returned to 
the office that originally decided your case. Any further inquiry must be made to that office. 
u 
2,~obert P. Wiemann, Chief 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The Director, Vermont Service Center, denied the employment-based immigrant visa petition. 
The matter is now before the Administrative Appeals Office on appeal. The decision of the director will be 
withdrawn and the petition will be remanded for further action and consideration. 
The petitioner seeks classification pursuant to section 203(b)(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 
8 U.S.C. !j 1 153(b)(2), as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree. The petitioner seeks 
employment as a research assistant at Boston University. The petitioner asserts that an exemption from the 
requirement of a job offer, and thus of a labor certification, is in the national interest of the United States. The 
director found that the petitioner qualifies for classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced 
degree, but that the petitioner has not established that an exemption fkom the requirement of a job offer would be 
in the national interest of the United States. 
The director has asked the AAO to remand the matter because "[dlue to a clerical error, the wrong denial notice 
appears to have been sent to the beneficiary." Review of the record appears to support the assertion that, in the 
decision, "evidence was referenced that had no bearing on this case." 
Therefore, pursuant to the director's request, this matter will be remanded. The director may request any 
additional evidence deemed warranted and should allow the petitioner to submit additional evidence in support of 
its position within a reasonable period of time. As always in these proceedings, the burden of proof rests solely 
with the petitioner. Section 29 1 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. !j 136 1. 
ORDER: 
 The director's decision is withdrawn. The petition is remanded to the director for further action 
in accordance with the foregoing and entry of a new decision which, if adverse to the petitioner, 
is to be certified to the Administrative Appeals Office for review.