sustained EB-2 NIW Case: Electrical Engineering

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
MATTER OF M-D-
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: SEPT. 18,2015 
APPEAL OF NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
PETITION: FORM I-140, IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER 
• 
The Petitioner, an electrical engineering researcher, seeks classification as a member of the professions 
holding an advanced degree, and 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. See Section 203(b )(2) of the 
Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(2). The Director, Nebraska Service 
Center, denied the petition. The matter is now before us on appeal. The appeal will be sustained. 
I. LAW 
Section 203(b) of the Act states, in pertinent part: 
(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) ... the 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. 
The Petitioner qualifies as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree. The sole issue 
in contention is whether the Petitioner has established that a waiver of the job offer requirement, and 
thus a labor certification, is in the national interest. 
(b)(6)
Matter of M-D-
Neither the statute nor the pertinent regulations define the term "national interest." Additionally , 
Congress did not provide a specific definition of "in the national interest." The Committee on the 
Judiciary merely noted in its report to the Senate that the committee had "focused on national 
interest by increasing the number and proportion of visas for immigrants who would benefit the 
United States economically and otherwise .. .. " S. Rep. No. 55, 101 st Cong., 1st Sess., 11 (1989). 
In reNew York State Dept a/Transportation , 22 I&N Dec. 215, 217-18 (Act. Assoc. Comm 'r 1998) 
(NYSDOT), has set forth several factors which must be considered when evaluating a request for a 
national interest waiver. First, a petitioner must establish that the beneficiary seeks employment in 
an area of substantial intrinsic merit. I d. at 217. Next, a petitioner must establish that the proposed 
benefit will be national in scope. Id. Finally, the petitioner seeking the waiver must establish that 
the beneficiary will serve the national interest to a substantially greater degree than would an 
available U.S. worker having the same minimum qualifications. I d. at 217-18. 
While the national interest waiver hinges on prospective national benefit, the petitioner must 
establish that the beneficiary's past record justifies projections of future benefit to the national 
interest. Id. at 219. The petitioner 's assurance that the beneficiary will, in the future, serve the 
national interest cannot suffice to establish prospective national benefit. The term "prospective " is 
included here to require future contributions by the beneficiary, rather than to facilitate the entry of a 
beneficiary with no demonstrable prior achievements, and whose benefit to the national interest 
would thus be entirely speculative. Id. 
II. PERTINENT FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY 
The Petitioner filed the Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker, on August 13, 2013, at 
which time he held a Master of Science degree in Electrical Engineering and was a Ph.D. candidate 
and research assistant in electrical engineering at in Canada. An accompanying 
statement indicated that the Petitioner's graduate research, in the field of nanophotonics and 
optoelectronics, has focused on improving the efficiency and functionality of light-emitting diode 
(LED) technologies and optical communications networks, and that his past projects have included the 
development of photonic crystal ring resonator-based devices, quantum dot micro-tube lasers, and 
nanowire light-emitting diodes. The Petitioner indicated that this work has resulted in the 
improvement and increased understanding of optical devices and networks. 
Documentation supporting the Form I-140 included evidence that the Petitioner had authored or co­
authored over thirty publications in his field at the time of filing, along with documentation about the 
rankings of the journals in which he had published work and evidence that his work had been cited 
389 times. The Petitioner also provided copies of his credentials and documentation of his activities 
as a peer-reviewer for multiple journals. 
In addition, the Petitioner submitted letters from former supervisors and independent academic 
researchers in his field describing his research in detail and attesting to its significance. The letters 
indicated that the Petitioner 's work is widely used by other researchers and described its 
2 
(b)(6)
Matter of M-D-
applications. For instance, an associate professor of Electrical and Systems 
Engineering at stated in a March 19, 2013, letter that the Petitioner's 
research is "being used by engineers across the board" and "is enabling us to fabricate various 
micro/nano photonic devices from advanced materials with desired properties." In a February 30, 
2013, letter, of the University of in Iran stated that the Petitioner 's 
research is "evolving entire paradigms of research and changing the way electrical engineers think 
about integrated circuits and photonic crystals," and that his publications are "working to make 
optical devices better engineered, more affordable, and more applicable for consumer use." The 
remaining letters offered similar statements regarding the importance and prominence of the 
Petitioner's research within his field. 
The Director issued a request for evidence (RFE) on September 13, 2013, seeking additional 
information and evidence about the Petitioner 's proposed work. The Director requested "probative 
evidence that [the] proposed employment is realistic and obtainable ," including letters from current 
or prospective employers , employment contracts , or a statement from the Petitioner detailing plans 
on how he intends to continue his work in the United States. 
In response, the Petitioner submitted the requested statement regarding his future plans, indicating 
his intent to conduct research aimed at expanding the use of light emitting diode (LED) technologies 
and the use of integrated nanophotonic circuits in chip-level optical communications. 
The Director denied the petition on July 7, 2014, finding that the Petitioner had not established that 
an exemption from the requirement of a job offer would be in the national interest of the United 
States. On appeal and in response to our April 8, 2015, RFE, the Petitioner submits documentation 
of his communications with two interested prospective employers in the United States, copies of 
articles in industry-specific media outlets reporting on his research results and innovations , and 
updated citation information regarding his publications. 
III. ANALYSIS 
The record reflects that the Petitioner's rese arch relates to improvin g the efficiency of optic al 
technologies, which offers both economic and environmental benefits on a national scale. 
Accordingly , he has established the substantial intrinsic merit and national scope of his proposed 
work. 
With respect to the third prong of the NYSDOT analysis, the record supports a finding that the 
Petitioner's work has had a degree of influence on the field as a whole. Id. at 219, n.6. The 
submitted letters give context to the Petitioner 's past research and explain its importance in ways 
that the record otherwise supports. The letters, media articles, and citation records provide 
persuasive evidence that the Petitioner's past research on photonic crystal ring resonator-based 
devices, quantum dot micro-tube lasers, and nanowire light-emitting diodes, has been considered 
significant and influential in his field. This track record of success, together with the evidence 
regarding the petitioner 's plans to expand on his past research, justify a projection that that the 
3 
Matter of M-D-
Petitioner will serve the national interest to a significantly greater degree than would an available 
U.S. worker having the same minimum qualifications. 
III. CONCLUSION 
As discussed above, the evidence in the record establishes that the benefit of retaining this 
Petitioner's services outweighs the national interest that is inherent in the labor certification process. 
Therefore, on the basis of the evidence submitted, the Petitioner has established that a waiver of the 
requirement of the job offer and labor certification will be in the national interest of the United 
States. 
In visa petition proceedings, it is the petitioner's burden to establish eligibility for the immigration 
benefit sought. Section 291 ofthe Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361; Matter ofOtiende, 26 I&N Dec. 127, 128 
(BIA 2013). Here, the Petitioner has met that burden. 
ORDER: The appeal is sustained. 
Cite as Matter of M-D-, ID# 10918 (AAO Sept. 18, 2015) 
4