The Petitioner seeks employment-based second preference (EB-2) immigrant classification for the Beneficiary 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).
USCIS denied the petition, concluding that the Beneficiary qualified for classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree, but that the Petitioner 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 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 Christa'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 the beneficiary is 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 the beneficiary's eligibility for the underlying EB-2 classification, it must then demonstrate that the beneficiary merits 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 bas both substantial merit and national importance;
- The individual is well-positioned to advance the proposed endeavor; and
- On balance, waiving the job offer requirement would benefit the United States.
Id.
Analysis
USCIS found that the Beneficiary qualified as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree, but that she had not satisfied any of the prongs set forth in the Dhanasar precedent decision. 2 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 Beneficiary was working for the Petitioner as a Digital Product Designer. 3 The Petitioner initially indicated that the Beneficiary's proposed endeavor involved "the development of cutting-edge enterprise connectivity technologies, including mobility technology, User Experience (UX), and User Interface (UI) design features." The Petitioner stated that "[t]he Beneficiary currently performs this important endeavor in the context of her employment as Digital Product Designer with [the Petitioner] in the United States, which her endeavor is critical to [the Petitioner's] global leadership in delivering electric and autonomous vehicle technologies." In addition, the Petitioner asserted that "[t]he Beneficiary's endeavor broadly consists of [her] serious, determined effort to contribute advanced technical skills, highly specialized knowledge, and immense talent to a dynamic, American-led industry to advance the United States' position as a critical manufacturer of cutting edge, safety oriented, and efficient vehicles."
In response to USCIS' request for evidence (RFE), the Petitioner stated that "[t]he Beneficiary's proposed endeavor as a Digital Product Designer is to advance the design and architecture ofenterprise-scale digital infrastructure in the automotive industry that enables large-scale commercial mobility, fleet management, and connected vehicle operations across the United States." The Petitioner further explained that the Beneficiary's undertaking involves conducting "customer interviews and research market data to understand customer needs, as well as apply the results to facilitate UI design sessions, enabling roadmap alignment"; representing "the user's perspective throughout the product lifecycle, from problem discovery, solution ideation and validation through iterative development and delivery"; maintaining "a user-centered approach in design perspective and practice, guiding product decisions through user research and iterative feedback loops"; designing, implementing, and adapting "digital design systems, data visualizations, on-brand visual design, and illustrations, as well as produce what is vital for successful 2 The Beneficiary received a Master of Fine Arts degree in Design from the.____________,in 2015 and a Master of Business Administration degree froml hn 2018.
implementation, pnont1zmg demos over documents"; and supporting "User Centered Design Methodology and Design Thinking to work with business partners, product managers, and business analysts to provide designs that meet business needs and are efficient, effective, and enjoyable." The Petitioner also wrote:
[T]he Beneficiary plays a pivotal role in leading the design, architecture, and modernization of enterprise-scale digital infrastructure that enables nationwide nextgeneration commercial mobility, fleet management, dealership networks, and connected vehicle operations within the commercial automotive industry and operating both nationally and internationally. The platforms she designs coordinate operational processes such as vehicle delivery, fleet monitoring, administrative governance, and service management across distributed operational environments. Moreover, her individual contributions produce broad, scalable, and lasting industry-wide impacts, scaling across thousands ofusers and operations, producing broad, durable, and industry-relevant impact across the commercial mobility ecosystem both nationally and internationally.
Specifically, the Beneficiary plays a critical role in establishing system architecture, shared design, and interaction frameworks; defining cross-product standards; and leading the development of core administrative and operational systems, frameworks, and platforms that multiple products, teams, and business units adopt and depend upon to ensure scalability, interoperability, and long-term modernization of enterprise mobility technologies. More specifically, she develops scalable UX/UI and system architectures, enterprise design systems, and scalable design standards, as well as interoperable operational platforms that enable organizations to manage vehicles, equipment, and mobility services efficiently at national and global scales.
In addition, the Petitioner stated that that "the Beneficiary's proposed endeavor focuses on the following core enterprise platforms and mission-critical digital infrastructure systems":
The~is a high-visibility browser-based single-page enterprise application deployed across dealerships throughout the U.S., Canada, and international markets, and used on tablets and mobile devices to digitize and standardize vehicle delivery operations.
Within this program, the Beneficiary serves as the Design Lead in the creation ofthe endto-end workflow architecture, including the design of delivery workflows, operational interfaces, and usability requirements used by dealership personnel during vehicle delivery operations. Her deployment of the tool extends its operational impact beyond a single region and contributes to measurable productivity gains across the broader automotive supply chain.
- [The Petitioner's]~------~
The Beneficiary has spearheaded vital modernization initiatives for this enterprise administrative platform, which is used to configure, manage, and govern operational web services across enterprise mobility systems. The~-----~platform consolidates previously fragmented administrative tools into a unified governance interface used across enterprise mobility systems. Through her efforts, the I lnow serves as the centralized administrative backbone providing identity, permissions, and operational controls across [the Petitioner's] web services, which enables internal teams to configure web experiences, manage permissions, and standardize operational workflows across multiple systems.
- [The Petitioner's] Pro Enterprise Operational Dashboard:
This organization-wide operational monitoring and management platform supports largescale oversight that allows internal teams to track vehicles, services, and system performance across enterprise mobility systems. It aggregates operational data from multiple enterprise systems and presents real-time performance indicators, service metrics, and operational insights used by engineering, product, and operations teams to monitor the health and activity ofmobility services.
- [The Petitioner's] Pro Back Office Operational Platform:
By way of background, the Back Office Operational Platform is an internal operational infrastructure platform supporting fleet onboarding, account administration, and service management across distributed operational teams for managing fleet customers. Because these processes involve multiple operational stakeholders-including internal support teams, dealership networks, and fleet service personnel-the platform functions as shared operational infrastructure supporting enterprise mobility services.
As discussed below, we conclude the Petitioner has not established the Beneficiary's eligibility for a national interest waiver under the analytical framework set forth in Dhanasar.
A. Substantial Merit and National Importance
The first Dhanasar prong, substantial merit and national importance, focuses on the specific endeavor that the individual proposes to undertake. Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. The endeavor's merit may be demonstrated in a range of areas such as business, entrepreneurialism, science, technology, culture, p. 5 health, or education. Id. We agree with the Petitioner that the Beneficiary's proposed endeavor has substantial merit. 4
In determining whether the proposed endeavor has national importance, we consider its potential prospective impact. Id. at 889. 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 has other broader implications indicating national importance. Id. at 889-90. USCIS determined the Petitioner did not establish the potential prospective impact of the Beneficiary's proposed work. 5 On appeal, the Petitioner argues that "the Beneficiary's proposed endeavor will be integral to the design, development, and integration of enterprise connectivity standards and the digital foundations of numerous platforms, as well as similar technologies at [the Petitioner]" and that "[the Petitioner's] market share and influence on the field of connected vehicle and autonomous vehicle technology is such that the Beneficiary's endeavor at [the Petitioner] ... will have national impact." The Petitioner further asserts that USCIS' decision disregarded evidence indicating "the scale and impact of [its] operations." While the Petitioner presented information on its U.S. manufacturing operations, global vehicle sales, and market share, it has not offered sufficient evidence showing that the Beneficiary's proposed endeavor stands to impact the field ofconnected vehicle and autonomous vehicle technology beyond her projects for the Petitioner. Benefits to a specific employer alone, even an employer with a national footprint such as the Petitioner, are not sufficiently relevant to the question of whether a beneficiary's endeavor has national importance. At issue is whether a petitioner can demonstrate that the beneficiary's own individual endeavor stands to have broader implications, such as for a field, a region, or the public at large. See generally 6 USCIS Policy Manual, F.5(D)(3), https:// www.uscis.gov/policy-manual.
The Petitioner contends that the Beneficiary's undertaking stands to impact "broader nationwide enterprise mobility infrastructure and global transportation ecosystems" and "the U.S. automotive sector and the development of an intelligent nationwide transportation system." The Petitioner, however, has not presented evidence to corroborate these claims. Counsel's unsubstantiated assertions do not constitute evidence.Claims not backed by documents See, e.g., Matter ofS-M-, 22 I&N Dec. 49, 51 (BIA 1998) ("statements in a brief, motion, or Notice of Appeal are not evidence and thus are not entitled to any evidentiary weight"). The issue here is not the broader implications of the Beneficiary's employer's innovative automotive technologies, but rather the potential prospective impact ofthe Beneficiary's specific work as a digital product designer.No broader implications shown
The Petitioner's documentation included the National Science and Technology Council's "Critical and Emerging Technologies List Update." The Petitioner indicates that this report identifies "HumanMachine Interfaces, which are squarely within the Beneficiary's endeavor." It asserts that "digital connected vehicle platforms and enterprise connectivity technology are critical to U.S. policy objectives and therefore critical to the national interest." USCIS recognizes the importance of progress in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields and the essential role that 4 USCIS' decision did not render a determination on this issue.
individuals with advanced STEM degrees have in fostering such progress. 6 USCIS Policy Manual F.5(D)(4), https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual/. While the Beneficiary's engagement in work related to a critical and emerging technology is a positive consideration, the Petitioner must still demonstrate that the Beneficiary's specific proposed endeavor has national importance.
The Petitioner asserts that it offered documentation showing "critical U.S. national security concerns" relating to the Beneficiary's proposed endeavor. The record contains information about U.S. trade policy, U.S.-China relations, strategic competition with China, ways American carmakers have lost ground in China, China's state-led economic development policies, China's threat to the U.S. automotive industry, China's drive for leadership in global research and development, autonomous vehicles as a national security threat, vague security standards relating to vehicle data collection, and the necessity of securing the information and communications technology of connected vehicles. The Petitioner, however, has not shown that the Beneficiary's specific proposed work stands to either affect "connected, autonomous, and electric vehicle production" in the United States or "protect U.S. national security digital infrastructure" in meaningful ways, or to otherwise offer broader implications in her field at a level indicative of national importance.
The Petitioner also presented articles on the general benefits of ensuring U.S. leadership in automated vehicle technologies, the safe integration of automated vehicles in the transportation system, a clear and consistent federal approach to shaping an automated vehicle policy, broadening access to federal artificial intelligence innovation efforts, the U.S. automotive industry's economic contributions, promoting electric vehicle (EV) technologies, expanding the national EV charging network, highskilled immigration for U.S. employment in STEM fields, automated software and electronics as drivers of developments in the automotive industry, automotive software advancements, 5G and edge computing in the automotive supply chain, technology in the automotive industry, mobility transformation, connected vehicles, job creation in the U.S. automotive industry, and reducing our country's goods and services trade deficit. While the Petitioner claims that these articles support the national importance of the Beneficiary's proposed endeavor, the determination of national importance does not focus on the importance of one's field or industry in general, but "focuses on the specific endeavor that the foreign national proposes to undertake."Proposed endeavor too vague Id. at 889. Here, none of the articles mention the Beneficiary or her planned projects, or otherwise speak to the potential prospective impact of her specific proposed endeavor to develop enterprise connectivity and digital infrastructure for the Petitioner.
In addition, the Petitioner points to letters of support from the Beneficiary's managers discussing her projects for the Petitioner. The Petitioner submitted letters from L-S-, C-D-, B-S-, D-Y-, and W-H-, who mainly discuss the Beneficiary's capabilities and experience in developing enterprise digital infrastructure for the Petitioner. 6 For example, W-H-, asserted that he served as the Product Manager responsible for the Petitioner's ~ Iplatform and worked closely with [ the Beneficiary] on the strategy, design, and rollout of the IW-H- further stated:
Thel Ifunctioned as the administrative backbone for [ the Petitioner's] web ecosystem. It supported identity management, permissions, and core operational controls used across multiple products and internal teams. Because of this, many 6 While we discuss a sampling of these letters, we have reviewed and considered each one. p. 7 downstream services were built on top ofthe standards and structures [the Beneficiary] established. In practice, the reliability and scalability ofnumerous initiatives depended directly on the platform she helped design.
As the product owner, I relied on [the Beneficiary] not only for design execution but also for system-level thinking, cross-team alignment, and long-term platform strategy.
She regularly collaborated with engineering, product, and business stakeholders to translate complex operational requirements into scalable, unified solutions. This type of infrastructure-focused design leadership is uncommon and is typically critical to the success of enterprise platforms.
From my perspective, the I !platform played an essential role in modernizing how [the Petitioner] operated and scaled its services.
The Beneficiary's skills, knowledge, and prior work in her field relate to the second prong of the Dhanasar framework, which "shifts the focus from the proposed endeavor to the foreign national." Id. at 890. The issue here is whether the specific endeavor that she proposes to undertake has national importance under Dhanasar 's first prong.
Regarding the Beneficiary's proposed endeavor's prospective impact, L-S-, Omni-Experience Manager for the Petitioner, wrote:
[The Beneficiary] has been impactfol to Platform Foundation Products such as the [the Petitionerl I I Common Experience Components Library, Authentication Experiences, Marketplace tools for Fleet Management Companies, as well as the new [ the Petitioner] Pro Dashboard. [The Beneficiary] plays a critical role on our design team, providing design subject matter expertise on [the Petitioner's] unified vehicle, software, charging, services, and financing product set that serves our commercial customer fleets on a large scale through increasing their productivity and uptime.
[The Beneficiary] contributes directly to the design of our digital products, she works to identify gaps in the current product experiences and create digital solutions to the problems our customers face on a daily basis. In this role, [the Beneficiary] contributes discovery research, data synthesis, design concepts and ideation, prototypes, and final delivery for her product area via Figma design software, rigorous user testing, handoff:
& Customers. As of recent, she has started to support a new initiative that will support all our customers, a new [the Petitioner] Pro customer Dashboard.
[The Beneficiary] helps our team to identify experience gaps in our products and components, all while applying creative thinking to support our customers' needs.
Through working with [the Beneficiary], I know her contributions and areas of expertise well, as I also support her directly with some of her workstreams. . . . [The Beneficiary] supports the full lifecycle process of our products and services, including early-stage discovery research, data analysis and synthesis, ideation/solution generation, prototype creation, product journey mapping and screen layout designs using Figma ( our design tool), and finally user acceptance testing to validate her designs and user flows within a responsive platform. [The Beneficiary's] skillset aligns well with iterating designs quickly to encourage new ways of solving customer problems, delivery of testable concepts, and to support the rapid product development process we have in our company.
While the Beneficiary's proposed endeavor contributes to the Petitioner's platform experiences and digital products, the Petitioner has not provided evidence demonstrating that her proposed work would affect her industry or field at a level indicative of national importance. It is insufficient to claim an endeavor has national importance or would create a broad impact without providing evidence to substantiate such claims. The letters from L-S-, C-D-, B-S-, D-Y-, and W-H- do not contain sufficient information and explanation, nor does the record include adequate corroborating evidence, to show that the Beneficiary's specific proposed work offers broader implications in her field or industry or substantial positive economic effects for our nation that rise to the level of national importance.Job creation or economic claims unsupported To evaluate whether the Beneficiary's proposed endeavor satisfies the national importance requirement we look to evidence documenting the "potential prospective impact" of her work. While the Beneficiary intends to develop enterprise-scale digital connected vehicle standards and platforms for her employer, the Petitioner has not offered sufficient information and evidence to demonstrate that the prospective impact of her proposed endeavor rises to the level of national importance. In Dhanasar, we determined that the petitioner's teaching activities did not rise to the level of having national importance because they would not impact his field more broadly. Id. at 893 . Here, we conclude the Petitioner has not shown that the Beneficiary's specific proposed endeavor stands to sufficiently extend beyond her employer and its projects to impact her field, the automotive industry, national security, or U.S . technological interests more broadly at a level commensurate with national importance.
Furthermore, the Petitioner has not demonstrated that the specific endeavor the Beneficiary proposes to undertake has significant potential to employ U.S . workers or otherwise offers substantial positive economic effects for our nation. Without sufficient information or evidence regarding any projected U.S. economic impact or job creation attributable to her future work, the record does not show that benefits to the regional or national economy resulting from the Beneficiary's projects would reach the level of"substantial positive economic effects" contemplated by Dhanasar. Id. at 890.
The Petitioner has not established that the Beneficiary's proposed endeavor has significant potential to employ U.S. workers (particularly in an economically depressed area), has other substantial positive p. 9 economic effects, has national or even global implications within the field, or has other broader implications indicating national importance.
B. The Remaining Dhanasar Prongs
Because the documentation in the record does not establish the national importance of the Beneficiary's proposed endeavor as required by the first prong of the Dhanasar precedent decision, the Petitioner has not demonstrated her eligibility for a national interest waiver. As this issue is dispositive of the Petitioner's appeal, we need not reach, and therefore reserve, determination of the Beneficiary's eligibility under the second and third prongs of the Dhanasar framework. See INS v. Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. 24, 25 (1976) (per curiam) (holding that agencies are not required to make "purely advisory findings" on issues that are unnecessary to the ultimate decision).
Conclusion
As the Beneficiary has not met the requisite first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework, we conclude that the Petitioner has not established she is eligible for or otherwise merits a national interest waiver as a matter of discretion.
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.
NOTICE: This constitutes the final decision in this matter. The filing of a motion will not postpone the effect of the decision. 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(l)(iv). Aliens who are not lawfully present, or who are otherwise inadmissible or deportable, may be subject to the commencement of removal proceedings under section 240 ofthe Act through the issuance of a Form 1-862, Notice to Appear. Those proceedings may result in their removal from the United States and possible ineligibility for future visas or other immigration benefits.