remanded EB-2 NIW Case: Travel Management

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re : 20603148 
Appeal of Nebraska Service Center Decision 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: MAY 12, 2022 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker (Advanced Degree, Exceptional Ability, National 
Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, a travel management specialist, 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 although the Petitioner 
qualified for the underlying classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree, 
she had not established that a waiver of the required job offer, and thus of the labor certification, would 
be in the national interest. The Petitioner appealed the matter to us, which we dismissed. The matter 
is again before us on a motion to reconsider. 1 
In these proceedings, it is the Petitioner's burden to establish eligibility for the requested benefit 
See section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361. Upon 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, 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. 
1 A motion to reconsider must (1) state the reasons for reconsideration and be supported by any pertinent precedent 
decisions to establish that the decision was based on an incorrect application oflaw or U.S. Citizenship and Immigration 
Services (USCIS) policy, and (2) establish that the decision was incorrect based on the evidence in the record of 
proceedings at the timeoftheinitialdecision . 8 C.F.R . § 103 .5(a)(3). 
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 of job 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 101 (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 definitions: 
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. 
Exceptional ability in the sciences, arts, or business means a degree of expertise 
significantly above that ordinarily encountered in the sciences, arts, or business. 
Profession means one of the occupations listed in section 1 0l(a)(32) of the Act, as well 
as any occupation for which a United States baccalaureate degree or its foreign 
equivalent is the minimum requirement for entry in the occupation. 
In addition to the definition of "advanced degree" provided at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2), the regulation 
at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(i)(B) provides that a petitioner present "[a]n official academic record 
showing that the alien has a United States baccalaureate degree or a foreign equivalent degree, and 
evidence in the form of letters from current or former employer( s) showing that the alien has at least 
five years of progressive post-baccalaureate experience in the specialty." 
2 
To demonstrate eligibility as an individual of exceptional ability, a pet1t10ner must submit 
documentation that satisfies at least three of the six categories of evidence listed at 8 C.F.R. 
§ 204.5(k)(3)(ii). 
Furthermore, while neither the statute nor the pertinent regulations define the term "national interesi" 
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). 2 Dhanasar states that after a petitioner has 
established eligibility for EB-2 classification, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) 
may, as matter of discretion 3, grant a national interest waiver if the 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) that, on balance, it 
would be beneficial to the United States to waive the requirements of a job off er and thus of a labor 
certification. See Id. at 888-91, for elaboration on these three prongs. 
II. ANALYSIS 
A. Eligibility for the Requested Classification 
As stated above, the first step to establishing eligibility for a national interest waiver is demonstrating 
qualification for the underlying EB-2 visa classification, as either an advanced degree professional or 
an individual of exceptional ability. In our dismissal of the prior appeal, we withdrew the Director's 
conclusion that the Petitioner had established eligibility as an advanced degree professional. 4 As we 
explained, the regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2) defines a profession, in pertinent part, as "any 
occupation for which a United States baccalaureate degree or its foreign equivalent is the minimum 
requirement for entry into the occupation." 
The Petitioner indicated in Part 6., Basic Information About the Proposed Employment, of the Form 
1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker, that her job title would be "Travel Management 
Specialist" and that the standard occupational classification (SOC) code is 39-7012, which 
conesponds to the occupation of"travel guide." 5 On the U.S. Department of Labor, Employment and 
Training Administration, Form ETA 7 5 0 Part B, Application for Alien Employment Certification, the 
Petitioner con firmed that she would be a "Travel Management Specialist" under "Occupation in which 
Alien is Seeking Work." 
2 In announcing this new framework, we vacated our prior precedent decision, Matter of New York State Department of 
Transportation, 22 I&NDec. 215 (Act. Assoc. Comm'r 1998) (NYSDOT). 
3 See also Poursina v. USCIS, 936F.3d 868, 2019 WL4051593 (9th Cir.2019) (finding USCTS' decision to grant or deny 
a national interest wa iverto be discretionary in nature). 
4 We also note concerns with the submitted education evaluation which concluded that the Applicant holds the equivalent 
of a U.S. master's degree in hospitality management. Although the evaluator provided a conclusion regarding the 
combination of the Petitioner's education and experience, he does not claim to have reviewed any employment letters to 
establish the Petitioner's work history or experience, as required by 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(i)(B). Further, the basis for 
such statements as the Petitioner served "in positions of progressively increasing responsibility and sophistication, 
characterized by the theoretical and practical application of specialized knowledge and training by superiors, together with 
peers, with advanced-level education in Hospitality Management and related areas" has not been established. 
5 Sec https:/ /www.onetonline.org/link/summary/3 9-7012.00 
3 
Here, the Petitioner has not established that a travel management specialist is a profession as defined 
by section 101 (a)(32) of the Act and 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2). However, the Petitioner also claims that 
she is an individual of exceptional ability. We, therefore, find it appropriate to remand the matter for 
the Director to make an initial determination regarding exceptional ability. 
B. Submitted Evidence 
The record contains a variety of evidence to support the Petitioner's assertions that she meets the three 
prongs of the Dhanasar analysis. For example, the Petitioner submitted printouts from her claimed 
website at I First, we note that, as of today, the provided internet address indicates 
that "the domain is not connected to a website." Further, the Petitioner appears to have copied much 
of the language verbatim from a number of other company's websites. On the page listing "Services," 
the section "Destination, branding, marketing and digital" is identical to the language from the section 
with the same name on https://www.team-tourism.com/consultancy-services/. Similarly, the section 
'·Anti-crisis consulting and management" appears to have been copied from portions of the website at 
https://cantortactical.com/travel-security-consulting/. In addition, the information from the "About" 
page, contains verbatim language from the "Travel & Tourism" page at https://www.consultants­
managers.com/travel-tourism.html. 
The Petitioner's business plan and presentation also contain language that appears to have been copied 
from a variety of other sources. For example, her discussion of the potential challenges for customers, 
hotels, and technology, uses verbatim language from an article posted at http://www.virtual-reality­
in-tourism.com/vr-future-selling-hotel-rooms/. In addition, her business model description contains 
identical language to that found in TripAdvisor's annual rep01i at 
http://annualreport.stocklight.com/NASDAQ/TRIP/19625684.pdf. Fmiher, much of her business 
plan appears to have been copied from https://ptgconsulting.com/. 
We further note that it is unclear whether the Petitioner was able to pursue two bachelor's degrees in 
different fields at two different universities while also working full-time between July 2009 and 
September 2011 as claimed. 
The Petitioner must resolve the above with independent, objective evidence pointing to where the truth 
lies. Matter ofHo, 19 I&N Dec. 582, 591-92 (BIA 1988). Unresolved material inconsistencies may lead 
us to reevaluate the reliability and sufficiency of other evidence submitted in support of the requested 
immigration benefit. Id. 
III. CONCLUSION 
For the reasons discussed above, we are remanding the petition for the Director to consider whether the 
Petitioner qualifies for EB-2 classification as an individual of exceptional ability. The Director may 
also wish to consider whether the Petitioner's submission of evidence which appears to have been 
copied from other sources without acknowledgement constitutes willful misrepresentation of a 
4 
material fact. 6 The Director may request any additional evidence considered pertinent to the new 
determination. 
ORDER: The decision of the Director is withdrawn. The matter is remanded for further 
proceedings consistent with the foregoing analysis and entry of a new decision. 
6 Section 212(a)(6)(C) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1 l 82(a)(6)(C),provides: 
Misrepresentation-(i) In general-Any alien who, by fraud or willfully misrepresenting a material fact, seeks to 
procure (or has sought to procure or has procured) a visa, other documentation, or admission into the United 
States or other benefit provided under this Act is inadmissible. 
To find a willful and material misrepresentation in visa petition proceedings, an immigration officer must detennine: 
I) that the petitioneror beneficiary made a false representation to an authorized official of the United States government; 
2) that the misrepresentation was willfully made; and 3) that the fact misrepresented was material. See Matter of M-, 
6 I&NDec. 149 (BIA 1954); MatterojL-L-, 9 I&NDec. 324 (BIA 1961); Kai Hing Hui, 15 I&NDec. at288. 
5