PetitionLens
All decisions
DismissedNational Interest Waiver · Appeal

Occupation not stated

Business & finance · decided 2021-08-11 · TSC · AUG112021_04B5203

Official PDF on uscis.gov

How each part of the test was decided

Read from the appeals office's own sentences by fixed rules, not from the Director's findings or the petitioner's arguments. Each result shows the sentence it came from. The official PDF controls.

  • Step 0Eligible for EB-2Not decided

    No finding on this in the appeals office's own words.

  • Prong 1Merit and national importanceNot met
    Why
    CONCLUSION As the Petitioner has not met the requisite first prong ofthe Dhanasar analytical framework, we conclude that he has not established he is eligible for or otherwise merits a national interest waiver as a matter of discretion. p. 5
  • Prong 2Well positioned to advance itNot decided

    No finding on this in the appeals office's own words.

  • Prong 3Worth waiving the job offerNot decided

    No finding on this in the appeals office's own words.

The decision in brief

Sentences picked out of the text automatically. Read them in context below; the official PDF controls.

Summary sentence

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. See in text

What the AAO decided

Main reasons given

  • Accordingly, the Petitioner's proposed work does not meet the first prong of the Dhanasar framework. See in text
  • As the Petitioner has not met the requisite first prong ofthe Dhanasar analytical framework, we conclude that he has not established he is eligible for or otherwise merits a national interest waiver as a matter of discretion. See in text
  • Because the documentation in the record does not establish the national importance of his proposed endeavor as required by the first prong of the Dhanasar precedent decision, the Petitioner has not demonstratedeligibilityforanationalinterestwaiver. See in text
Show 2 more
  • 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. See in text
  • WithoutsufficientinformationorevidenceregardinganyprojectedU.S.economic impact or job creation attributable to his future work, the record does not show that benefits to the U.S. regional or national economy resulting from the Petitioner's participation in architectural design projects would reach the level of "substantial positive economic effects" contemplated by Dhanasar. See in text
Read the full decision (5 pages)

Objections found (2)

Automated tags. Each shows the sentence that triggered it.

  • Here, we conclude the record does not show that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor stands to sufficiently extend beyond his employers and their clientele to impact his field or the U.S. healthcare industry more broadly at a level commensurate with national importance. See in text (p. 4)
  • Furthermore, the Petitioner has not demonstrated that the specific endeavor he proposes to undertake has significant potential to employ U.S. workers or otherwise offers substantial positive economic effectsforournation. See in text (p. 4)

Full decision

OCR text from the official PDF, reformatted for reading. Scan errors carry over; the PDF controls.

Highlighted: Outcome (2) AAO finding (5) Tagged objection (2)Matter of X citation
Decision header
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services · In Re: 11105896 · Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision · Non-Precedent Decision of the Administrative Appeals Office · Date: AUG. 11, 2021 · Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker (Advanced Degree, Exceptional Ability, National Interest Waiver)

The Petitioner seeks second preference 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. § 1153(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.

On appeal, the Petitioner submits a brief asserting that he is eligible for a national interest waiver. In these proceedings, it is the petitioner's burden to establish eligibility for the immigration benefit sought. Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361. Upon de nova review, we will dismiss the appeal.

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. Because this classification requires that the individual's services be sought by a U.S. employer, a separate showing is required to establish that a waiver of the job offer requirement is in the national interest.

Section 203 (b) of the Act sets out this sequential framework:

(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 p. 2 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 ofthe United States, and whose services in the sciences, arts, professions, or business are sought by an employer in the United States.

(B) Waiver ofjob offer-

(i) National interest waiver. . . . [T]he 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.

While neither the statute nor the pertinent regulations define the term "national interest," we set forth a framework for adjudicating national interest waiver petitions in the precedent decision Matter of Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. 884 (AAO 2016). eligibility for EB-2 classification, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) may, as matter of discretion,2 grant a national interest waiver if the petitioner demonstrates: (1) that the foreign national's proposed endeavor has both substantial merit and national importance; (2) that the foreign national is well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor; and (3) 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.

The first prong, substantial merit and national importance, focuses on the specific endeavor that the foreignnationalproposestoundertake. Theendeavor'smeritmaybedemonstratedinarangeofareas 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.

The second prong shifts the focus from the proposed endeavor to the foreign national. To determine whether he or she is well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor, we consider factors including, but not limited to: the individual's 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.

The third prong requires the 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, USCIS may evaluate factors such as: whether, in light of the nature of the foreign national's qualifications or the proposed endeavor, it would be impractical either for the foreign national to secure a job offer or for the petitioner to obtain a labor certification; whether, even assuming that other qualified U.S. workers are available, the United States would still benefit from the foreign national's contributions; and whether the national interest in the foreign national's contributions is See also Poursina v. USC1S, No. 17-16579, 2019 WL 4051593 (Aug. 28, 2019) (finding USCIS' decision to grant or deny a national interest waiver to be discretionary in nature).

Dhanasar states that after a petitioner has established In announcing this new framework, we vacated our prior precedent decision, Matter ofNew York State Department of Transportation, 22 l&N Dec. 215 (Act. Assoc. Comm'r 1998) (NYSDOT). p. 3 sufficiently urgent to warrant forgoing the labor certification process. In each case, the factor(s) considered must, taken together, indicate that on balance, it would be beneficial to the United States The Director found that the Petitioner qualifies as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree. The remaining 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. For the reasons discussed below, we agree with the Director that the Petitioner has not sufficiently demonstrated the national importance of his proposed endeavor under the first prong of the Dhanasar Regarding his claim of eligibility under Dhanasar' s first prong, the Petitioner asserts that he intends to continue working in the field of architecture in the United States. The Petitioner is currently employed as a designer with C-, an architectural design firm, where he "has been supporting the company's projects to expand and build three healthcare facilities in [Maryland]." He further discusses his proposed Ideally, with the approval of this petition, I will grow into a Senior Designer role at my company and contribute to the improvement of American land-building construction techniques. My work will bring economic growth and will attract local professionals to join my projects. Through my projects, I will establish business activities which will open to waive the requirements of a job offer and thus of a labor certification.

Analysis

analytical framework. endeavor, as follows: doors and new business between the U.S. and Brazil, and the U.S. and Portugal. will help the economy, locally, and nationally. This

I can use my expertise to work on any architectural project phase, local, national, and international; attract new business to my company [C-] using my professional network and knowledge; [and], deliver high quality projects to clients o f my company.

The record includes information about the job outlook for architectural drafters and architects, the demand for architects in the United States, the impact of hospitals as economic drivers within their communities, the importance ofhigh performing healthcare infrastructure to the United States, as well as the need to build hospitals that are resilient to natural or human-induced disasters. In addition, the Petitioner provides articles discussing guidance for becoming an architectural drafter or architect. The record therefore shows that the Petitioner's proposed work as an architectural drafter has substantial merit.

The Petitioner submitted evidence to establish his eligibility for the benefit sought in the petition. While we may not discuss every document submitted, we have reviewed and considered each one.

We note that, while information about the nature of the Petitioner's proposed endeavor is necessary for us to determine whether he satisfies the Dhanasar framework, he need not have a job offer from a specific employer as he is applying for a waiver of the job offer requirement.

Notably, the Petitioner does not further explain or document how his work within the field of architecture in the United States will "establish business activities which will open doors and new business between the U.S. and Brazil, and the U.S. and Portugal."

See Dhanasar, 26 T&N Dec. at 888-91, for elaboration on these three prongs.

In determining national importance, the relevant question is not the importance of the field, industry, or profession in which the individual will work; instead we focus on the "the specific endeavor that the foreign national proposes to undertake." See Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. In Dhanasar, we further noted that "we look for broader implications" of the proposed endeavor and that "[a]n undertaking may have national importance for example, because it has national or even global implications within a particular field." Id. We also stated that "[a]n endeavor that has significant potential to employ U.S. workers or has other substantial positive economic effects, particularly in an economically depressed area, for instance, may well be understood to have national importance." Id. at 890.

On appeal, the Petitioner highlights that he has "over ten (10) years ofprogressive experience in the field ofreal estate, healthcare, construction and architecture, among others," and references the knowledge that he gained through his academic degrees within the field of architecture. The Petitioner's experience acquired through his years o f employment and his academic pursuits in the field relate to the second prong ofthe 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 he proposes to undertake has national importance under Dhanasar's first prong.

Additionally, the Petitioner asserts that his "field of endeavor includes the design and construction of healthcare facilities, which are vital to the nation, both on a societal and economic level." He also contends that his undertaking "will produce substantially positive social and economic opportunities for the nation, due to the ripple effects ofhis professional activities." The Petitioner further states that through his work in the field he "will generate social and economic opportunities, which when implemented by other companies in the industry, will maximize business revenue, and ultimately will increase the flow of money in the U.S. on a national level, thus contributing to U.S. gross domestic product (GDP)."

To evaluate whether the Petitioner's proposed endeavor satisfies the national importance requirement we look to evidence documenting the "potential prospective impact" of his work. The Petitioner's statements reflect his intention to be employed as an architectural drafter who seeks to ultimately become a senior designer with an architectural firm, but he has not offered sufficient infonnation and evidence to demonstrate that the prospective impact of his 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 record does not show that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor stands to sufficiently extend beyond his employers and their clientele to impact his field or the U.S. healthcare industry more broadly at a level commensurate with national importance.No broader implications shown

Furthermore, the Petitioner has not demonstrated that the specific endeavor he proposes to undertake has significant potential to employ U.S. workers or otherwise offers substantial positive economic effectsforournation.Job creation or economic claims unsupported WithoutsufficientinformationorevidenceregardinganyprojectedU.S.economic impact or job creation attributable to his future work, the record does not show that benefits to the U.S. regional or national economy resulting from the Petitioner's participation in architectural design projects would reach the level of "substantial positive economic effects" contemplated by Dhanasar. Id. at 890. Accordingly, the Petitioner's proposed work does not meet the first prong of the Dhanasar framework.

Because the documentation in the record does not establish the national importance of his proposed endeavor as required by the first prong of the Dhanasar precedent decision, the Petitioner has not demonstratedeligibilityforanationalinterestwaiver. Furtheranalysisofhiseligibilityunderthesecond and third prongs outlined in Dhanasar, therefore, would serve no meaningful purpose.

Conclusion

As the Petitioner has not met the requisite first prong ofthe Dhanasar analytical framework, we conclude that he has not established he is eligible for or otherwise merits a national interest waiver as a matter of discretion.

ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.