sustained EB-2 NIW Case: Chemistry

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: NOV. 18, 2024 In Re: 34817 497 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner seeks employment-based second preference (EB-2) 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. § 1 l 53(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 he 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. 
The Petitioner bears the burden of proof to demonstrate eligibility by a preponderance of the evidence. 
Matter ofChawathe, 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 will sustain the appeal. 
I. LAW 
To qualify for the underlying EB-2 visa classification, a petitioner must establish they are an advanced 
degree professional or an individual of exceptional ability in the sciences, arts, or business. Section 
203(b )(2)(A) of the Act. If a petitioner establishes eligibility for the underlying EB-2 classification, 
they must then demonstrate 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, 1 grant a national 
interest waiver if the petitioner demonstrates that: 
• The proposed endeavor has both substantial merit and national importance; 
1 See Flores v. Garland, 72 F.4th 85, 88 (5th Cir. 2023) (joining the Ninth, Eleventh, and D.C. Circuit Courts (and Third 
in an unpublished decision) in concluding that USCIS' decision to grant or deny a national interest waiver is discretionary 
in nature). 
• The individual is well-positioned to advance their proposed endeavor; and 
• On balance, waiving the job offer requirement would benefit the United States. 
Id. 
II. ANALYSIS 
The Director found that the Petitioner qualifies as a member of the professions holding an advanced 
degree. The sole 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 employed as a professor at ___________ 
in Nigeria. Regarding his proposed endeavor, the Petitioner stated that he intended "to continue his 
research on developing and optimizing nanostructured materials to effectively remove emerging 
contaminants, microplastics, and radionuclides from water in order to improve water treatment, 
desalinization, and renewable energy applications." He further indicated that he planned to "develop 
protocols for the synthesis and characterization of different functionalized, nanostructured 
semiconducting single and mixed-metal oxide materials for photocatalytic degradation of pollutants, 
salinity reduction in wastewater, and energy harvesting." The Petitioner also asserts that he "will 
continue to publish original chemistry research in peer-reviewed journal articles and conference 
papers." For the reasons discussed below, we conclude the Petitioner has established eligibility for a 
national interest waiver under the analytical framework set forth in Dhanasar. 
A. Substantial Merit and National Importance of the Proposed Endeavor 
We withdraw the Director 's determination that the Petitioner did not establish the national importance 
of his proposed endeavor under Dhanasar 's first prong. In determining whether the proposed 
endeavor has national importance, we consider its potential prospective impact. Dhanasar, 26 I&N 
Dec. at 889. As evidence that his proposed research has substantial merit and national importance, the 
Petitioner presented information about Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PF AS), 
adverse health effects associated with contaminated drinking water, the Safe Water Drinking Act, the 
U.S. Action Plan on Global Water Security, and water contamination and diseases. 2 He also provided 
letters of support discussing how his undertaking contributes to advancements in using nanomaterials 
as absorbents and catalysts for wastewater treatment and contaminant removal. Additionally, the 
Petitioner submitted documentation indicating that the benefit of his proposed research offers broader 
implications for the field of chemistry, as the results are disseminated to others in the field through 
scientific journals and conferences. As the Petitioner has demonstrated both the substantial merit and 
national importance of his proposed research, he has established that he meets the first prong of the 
Dhanasar framework. 
2 This infonnation includes articles about U.S. National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, U.S . Environmental 
Protection Agency, U.S. Department of State, and Biden-Harris Administration initiatives to protect communities from 
PFAS contamination and ensure safe drinking water. 
2 
B. Well Positioned to Advance the Proposed Endeavor 
We also withdraw the Director's conclusion that the Petitioner did not establish he meets Dhanasar's 
second prong. To determine whether an individual is well positioned to advance the proposed 
endeavor, we consider factors including, but not limited to: their education, skills, knowledge and 
record of success in related or similar efforts; a model or plan for future activities; any progress 
towards achieving the proposed endeavor; and the interest of potential customers, users, investors, or 
other relevant entities or individuals. Dhanasar, 26 I&N at 890. 
The record includes the Petitioner's curriculum vitae, academic records (including his Ph.D. in 
Chemistry), published and presented work, peer review service, and documentation of numerous 
articles that cited to his research findings. 3 In addition, the Petitioner offered reference letters 
describing his expertise in chemistry and his past record of success in his research field. Several expert 
references identify specific examples of how the Petitioner's research progress in improving 
wastewater treatment methods has affected his field. As corroborating documentation regarding the 
significance of his work, the Petitioner provided evidence showing that his published work has been 
frequently cited by independent researchers, and that the rate at which his work has been cited is high 
relative to others in the field. His experience and expertise as chemistry researcher, published articles, 
citation evidence, record of success contributing to various research projects, and progress in his field 
position him well to advance his proposed endeavor. Accordingly, the Petitioner has demonstrated 
that he satisfies the second prong of the Dhanasar framework. 
C. Balancing Factors to Determine Waiver's Benefit to the United States 
Furthermore, we withdraw the Director's determination that the Petitioner did not establish he meets 
Dhanasar 's third prong. This prong requires a petitioner to demonstrate 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. 
Id. at 890. 4 As a scientific researcher, the Petitioner possesses considerable experience and expertise in 
inorganic chemistry. The record also demonstrates the widespread benefits associated with research 
progress improving the effectiveness of wastewater treatment methods. In addition, the Petitioner has 
documented his past successes in advancing research in using nanomaterials as absorbents and catalysts 
for wastewater treatment and contaminant removal. Based on the Petitioner's track record of successful 
research and the significance of his proposed work to advance U.S. clean water initiatives, we conclude 
that he offers contributions of such value that, on balance, they would benefit the United States even 
assuming that other qualified U.S. workers are available. The Petitioner therefore satisfies the third prong 
of the Dhanasar framework. 
3 "USCIS considers an advanced degree, particularly a Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.), in a STEM field tied to the proposed 
endeavor and related to work fu11hering a critical and emerging technology or other STEM area important to U.S. 
competitiveness or national security, an especially positive factor to be considered along with other evidence for purposes 
of the assessment under the second prong." See 6 USCIS Policy Manual F.5(D)(2), https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual. 
4 When evaluating the third prong. USCTS considers the following combination of facts contained in the record to be a 
strong positive factor: 
• The person possesses an advanced STEM degree, particularly a Ph.D.; 
• The person will be engaged in work furthering a critical and emerging technology or other STEM area important 
to U.S. competitiveness; and 
• The person is well positioned to advance the proposed STEM endeavor of national importance. 
See USCIS Policy Manual, supra. at F.5(D)(2). 
3 
III. CONCLUSION 
The Petitioner has met the requisite three prongs set forth in the Dhanasar analytical framework. We 
conclude that he has established he is eligible for and otherwise merits a national interest waiver as a 
matter of discretion. 
ORDER: The appeal is sustained. 
4