The Petitioner, a logistics management consultant, 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. § 1153(b )(2).
Service Center Operations (SCOPS) denied the petition, concluding that the record did not establish 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 pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 103.3.
The Petitioner bears the burden ofproof 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 I&N Dec. 537, 537 n.2 (AAO 2015). Upon de novo review, we will dismiss the appeal.
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. Matter ofDhanasar, 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.
Id.
Analysis
SCOPS determined the Petitioner qualified for EB-2 classification as an advanced degree professional. We agree. The only issue on appeal is whether she qualifies for and merits a waiver of the job offer requirement in the national interest.
In her business plan, the Petitioner states she will serve as the chief executive officer of a company "providing specialized logistics and export consulting services" to small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) "to help them optimize logistics operations, secure competitive freight rates, and ensure compliance with regulations" and "enhance efficiency and reduce costs." The business plan states the Petitioner also "endeavors to enhance SMEs' export and international trade capabilities, particularly in relation to the Brazilian and Latin American markets." The business plan indicates the company will be located inl IFlorida.
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. Id. The endeavor's merit may be demonstrated in a range of areas such as business, entrepreneurialism, science, technology, culture, health, or education. Id. SCOPS determined the Petitioner's proposed endeavor has substantial merit. We agree.
In determining whether the proposed endeavor has national importance, we consider its potential prospective impact. Id. This consideration may include whether the proposed endeavor has significant potential to employ U.S. workers (particularly in an economically depressed area), has other substantial positive economic effects, has national or even global implications within the field, or other broader implications indicating national importance. Id. at 889-90. SCOPS determined the Petitioner did not establish the national importance of her proposed endeavor under these factors.
On appeal, the Petitioner asserts her proposed endeavor has national importance because it will strengthen supply chain resilience by implementing advanced reverse logistics, promote sustainable business practices by integrating sustainability into logistics operations, and enhance trade relations with Brazil and Latin America by helping U.S. businesses navigate complex trade laws, reduce tariffs, and comply with regional regulations. The Petitioner cites no evidence to support these claims. The record also does not establish that the Petitioner's work would extend beyond her company and its clients to impact her field more broadly at a level indicative of national importance.No broader implications shown See id. at 889 ( explaining "we look for broader implications").
The Petitioner also claims her proposed endeavor will benefit healthcare by ensuring the timely delivery of critical supplies, optimize order fulfillment and returns management to improve efficiency and customer satisfaction in the e-commerce industry, and address the challenges of transporting perishable goods. Again, the Petitioner cites no evidence to support these claims and the record does not establish that the Petitioner's work would extend beyond individual businesses to impact these areas in a manner commensurate with national importance.
The Petitioner further asserts her proposed endeavor has national or global implications comparable to improved manufacturing processes referenced in Dhanasar. The Petitioner claims her "work p. 3 I transforms logistics and operational systems, delivering financial and operational advantages to U.S. companies while contributing to broader national economic goals." The Petitioner cites no evidence to support this claim, and the record does not demonstrate that the Petitioner's work would extend beyond her company's individual clients to broadly impact the U.S. economy.
The Petitioner submitted articles on the logistics industry, Amazon, the North America contract logistics market, the U.S. logistics and transportation industry, administrative services and facilities managers, Latin American markets, the transportation, distribution and logistics sector, COVID-19 impact on logistics and supply chain industry market, transportation employment, joint statement of President Trump and President Bolsonaro, the business consulting industry, reasons why organizations hire consultants, third-party logistics, Fortune 500 companies are using third-party logistics providers more, immigration and entrepreneurship in the United States, distribution and logistics consulting services in the United States, management consulting in the United States, the logistics performance effect in international trade, the importance of logistics in foreign trade and planning of logistical infrastructure, logistics consultants, logisticians, America's supply chain woes, global supply chains' crisis, supply chain issues and inflation, immigrants in the United States are more likely to start firms and create jobs, and the role of logistics performance in international trade. None of these articles address the Petitioner's proposed endeavor. Our assessment of national importance does not focus on the importance of a field, occupation or related issues in general, but instead "focuses on the specific endeavor that the foreign national proposes to undertake."Proposed endeavor too vague Id. Cf id. at 892 ( citing media articles and other evidence documenting Congressional interest in Dhanasar's research).
The Petitioner submitted a letter from V-L-2
, Associate Professor of Marketing at~-----~
I expressing his opinion that the Petitioner qualifies for a national interest waiver. V-L-claims the Petitioner's proposed endeavor has national or global implications in the field of supply chain and logistics. V-L- discusses the Third-Party Logistics industry and concludes the Petitioner will "develop marketing strategies, increase customer portfolios, improve operational processes and coordinate projects in distribution areas" as well as optimize production for businesses in the United States and "provide marketing insights for the Brazilian companies that plan to conduct business in the United States, as well as for U.S. companies looking to expand their business into the Latin America market." V-L- does not demonstrate, however, that any of these services are novel, unique or otherwise have national or global implications in the Petitioner's field. See id. at 889. (discussing improved manufacturing processes or medical advances as examples of national or even global implications within a particular field).
V-L- also asserts the Petitioner's proposed endeavor has significant potential to employ U.S. workers and has other substantial positive economic effects in economically depressed areas. V-L- does not specify any economically depressed areas in which the Petitioner would work. V-L- states the Petitioner will "help small and medium-sized enterprises in the U.S. improve operations and achieve better productivity and profitability levels, therefore generating revenues within the country and creating employment opportunities." However, the Petitioner's business plan projects the company will employ just five people in the first year, increasing to 15 in the fifth year, and will generate a net profit of $33,103 the first year, increasing to $95,532 in the fifth year. These projections do not demonstrate that the Petitioner's company has significant potential to employ U.S. workers given that, 2 We use initials to protect the privacy of the referenced individuals. p. 4 as V-L- states, the warehousing sector and related industries employ over 13.3 million people.Job creation or economic claims unsupported The projections also do not indicate the Petitioner's company would have substantial positive economic effects in the logistics and transportation industry that V-L- states is valued at $1.64 trillion. V-L- farther claims the Petitioner's proposed endeavor will broadly enhance societal welfare or cultural enrichment by increasing marketing opportunities for U.S. companies, alleviate logistics challenges prevalent in major industries, including fast-moving consumer goods and healthcare due to the COVID-19 impact. V-L- does not explain how the Petitioner's work would extend beyond her company and clients to impact society and culture more broadly in a manner commensurate with national importance. V-L- also asserts the Petitioner's proposed endeavor impacts a matter that a government entity has described as having national importance or is the subject of national initiatives. V-L- discusses U.S. trade with Brazil and the Latin American commercial sector and states the Petitioner can help U.S. firms entering the Brazilian market. V-L- does not establish that the Petitioner's work would extend beyond individual firms to impact U.S. trade with Brazil or Latin America at a level indicative of national importance.
The Petitioner submitted a letter from her former employer W-P-, who attests to her prior achievements and skills, but does not address her specific proposed endeavor. Cf id. (stating Dhanasar submitted probative expert letters describing the importance of his specific research as it related to U.S. strategic interests).
In sum, the record does not establish that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor has national importance as it does not have significant potential to employ U.S. workers, other substantial positive economic effects, national or even global implications within her field, or other broader implications indicating national importance.
B. The Remaining Dhanasar Prongs
The Petitioner has not established the national importance ofher specific proposed endeavor and does not meet the first prong of the Dhanasar framework. As this issue is dispositive of the Petitioner's appeal, we decline to reach and hereby reserve determination of her eligibility under the second and third prongs of the Dhanasar framework. See INS v. Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. 24, 25 (1976) (stating that "courts and agencies are not required to make findings on issues the decision of which is unnecessary to the results they reach").
Conclusion
The Petitioner has not established the national importance ofher proposed endeavor and does not meet the first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework. Consequently, the Petitioner has not demonstrated that she is eligible for or merits a waiver of the job offer requirement in the national interest as a matter of discretion.
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.