sustained EB-2 NIW Case: Veterinary Medicine

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
Non-Precedent Decision of the
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date: AUG. 08, 2023 In Re: 28049346 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, a researcher in the field of veterinary medicine, 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 classification . 
See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 203(b)(2), 8 U.S.C. § l 153(b)(2). 
The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the record did not 
establish that the Petitioner was eligible for, and merited as a matter of discretion, a national interest 
waiver. The matter is now before us on appeal. 8 C.F.R. § 103.3. 
The Petitioner bears the burden of proof to demonstrate eligibility by a preponderance of the evidence. 
Matter ofChawath e, 25 I&N Dec. 369, 375-76 (AAO 2010). We review the questions in this matter 
de novo. Matter of Christo 's, Inc. , 26 I&N Dec. 537, 537 n.2 (AAO 2015). Upon de novo review, 
we will sustain the appeal. 
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. 
An advanced degree is any United States academic or professional degree or a foreign equivalent 
degree above that of a bachelor's degree. A United States bachelor 's degree or foreign equivalent 
degree followed by five years of progressive experience in the specialty is the equivalent of a master's 
degree. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2). 
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 1, 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. 
II. ANALYSIS 
The Petitioner is a researcher in the field of veterinary medicine, with a focus on infectious diseases 
and antibiotic resistance. He earned a PhD. in veterinary medical science froml !University in 
2016, and at the time of filing he was employed as a graduate research assistant at the University of 
12I The Director concluded that he is eligible as a member of the professions holding an 
advanced degree. Therefore, the sole issue on appeal is whether he is eligible for, and merits as a 
matter of discretion, a national interest waiver. 
A. Substantial Merit and National Importance 
The first prong, substantial merit and 
national importance, focuses on the specific endeavor that the 
individual proposes to undertake. The endeavor's merit may be demonstrated in a range of areas such 
as business, entrepreneurialism, science, technology, culture, health, or education. In determining 
whether the proposed endeavor has national importance, we consider its potential prospective impact. 
Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. 
The Petitioner proposes to continue his research in infectious diseases in animals and antibiotic 
resistance at the University I I In his decision, the Director concluded that the Petitioner's 
proposed endeavor was of substantial merit and national importance. Based on our review of the 
record, we agree. As we noted in Dhanasar, endeavors related to research, pure science, and the 
furtherance of human knowledge may be of substantial merit without any economic benefits. Id. In 
addition, many proposed endeavors aiming to advance STEM technologies and research are of 
substantial merit. See generally 6 USCJS Policy Manual F.5(D)(2), www.uscis.gov/policy-manual. 
Here, the proposed endeavor's substantial benefits to science and animal and human health have been 
demonstrated through several expert letters and government reports. 
Turning to the national importance of his proposed endeavor, the Petitioner submitted evidence from 
the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) regarding the interconnectedness of the threat 
from antibiotic resistance in humans, animals, and the environment, as well as a White House report 
on a national action plan to combat antibiotic-resistant bacteria. In addition, he submitted evidence of 
his research on the use of antibiotics in food animals such as cattle which could result in additional 
antimicrobial resistance in bacteria that could be transferred to humans. This was further supported 
by letters written by experts in the Petitioner's field, including! lof the University 
1 See also Poursina v. USC1S, 936 F.3d 868 (9th Cir. 2019) (finding USCIS' decision to grant or deny a national interest 
waiver to be discretionary in nature). 
2 We note that in response to the Director's request for evidence (RFE) he submitted evidence that he had accepted an offer 
as a post-doctoral research associate with the same institution. 
2 
._______.I who was his Ph.D. and postdoctoral advisor. We agree that this evidence shows the national 
importance of his proposed endeavor. 
B. Well Positioned to Advance the Proposed Endeavor 
The second prong shifts the focus from the proposed endeavor to the individual. To determine whether 
they are 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. Id. at 890. 
The Director determined that the Petitioner did not establish that he is well positioned to advance his 
proposed endeavor, but as the Petitioner asserts on appeal, he did not provide a sufficient analysis 
which explains the specific reasons for this conclusion. 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(l)(i). Our review of the 
record shows by a preponderance of the evidence that the Petitioner is well positioned to advance his 
proposed endeavor. 
As previously noted, the Petitioner earned a Ph.D. in veterinary medical science in 2016, a STEM field 
directly related to his proposed endeavor, and since that time he has worked as a researcher and 
instructor in this field, gaining advanced skills and knowledge. The results of this research have 
appeared in more than 40 conference presentations and journal articles authored by the Petitioner, 
which have been cited by other researchers in their own published work hundreds of times, 
demonstrating his record of success in advancing his proposed endeavor. I I states in his 
letter that the Petitioner's development of a novel algorithm for early detection of inflammation in 
cows helps to reduce the routine administration of antibiotics, thus helping to reduce the dissemination 
of antibiotic-resistant bacteria to the environment and humans. In addition, the Petitioner has 
presented a plan for continuing his research in the areas of antimicrobial resistance, microbial-host 
interactions in large animals, and the use of advanced modeling techniques for the tracking of 
infectious diseases among food animals. Considering the totality of this evidence and its support of 
the nonexclusive second prong factors provided in Dhanasar, we conclude that the Petitioner is well 
positioned to advance his proposed endeavor. 
C. Whether on Balance a Waiver is Beneficial 
The third 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. In performing 
this analysis, we may evaluate factors such as: whether, in light of the nature of the individual's 
qualifications or the proposed endeavor, it would be impractical either for them to secure a job offer 
or to obtain a labor certification; whether, even assuming that other qualified U.S. workers are 
available, the United States would still benefit from their contributions; and whether the national 
interest in their contributions is sufficiently urgent to warrant forgoing the labor certification process. 
In each case, the factor(s) considered must, taken together, establish 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 890-91. 
3 
I 
As with the second prong, despite listing the factors to be considered under the third prong of the 
Dhanasar framework, the Director did not provide any analysis of the Petitioner's statements or 
evidence submitted in support of the benefits of waiving the labor certification process in his case. On 
appeal, the Petitioner again refers to his STEM degrees in veterinary animal science and his proposed 
endeavor in this area, as well his established positioning to advance his proposed endeavor. He also 
points out a letter from the chief of a laboratory of the I 
.________ _.where he has conducted research, noting the impact of his research on prevention 
of infectious diseases in sheep and cattle to the state's agricultural industry. In addition to these 
considerations, we note the national importance in preventing the spread of antibacterial resistance, 
the Petitioner's record of success in his previous research projects, and the interest of other researchers 
and government agencies in his work. We therefore conclude that the benefits to be provided by his 
proposed endeavor, even if other U.S. workers are available, outweigh the benefits inherent in the 
labor certification process, and are therefore sufficient to justify a waiver of the EB-2 classification's 
job offer requirement. 
III. CONCLUSION 
The Petitioner has established his eligibility for a national interest waiver under the Dhanasar 
analytical framework, and we conclude that the waiver is warranted as a matter of discretion. 
ORDER: The appeal is sustained. 
4