PetitionLens
Log inGet started
All decisions
MotionNational Interest Waiver · Motion to reopen & reconsider

Occupation not stated

Other / unclear · decided 2023-08-24 · TSC · AUG242023_03B5203

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 decided
    The Director's denial rested on this
    Although the record establishes that the Petitioner qualifies for classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree, in relevant part the Director concluded that the record does not establish that the proposed endeavor has national importance. p. 1
  • 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

Although the record establishes that the Petitioner qualifies for classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree, in relevant part the Director concluded that the record does not establish that the proposed endeavor has national importance. See in text

What the AAO decided

  • Therefore, we address the merits of the submissions in our decision on the previously submitted combined motions, In Re: 22046022, and we will dismiss the instant submission as moot. See in text
  • ORDER: The motion to reopen is dismissed. See in text
  • FURTHER ORDER: The motion to reconsider is dismissed. See in text
Read the full decision (1 page)

Objections found (0)

Automated tags. Each shows the sentence that triggered it.

No catalog objection was detected in the analysis section.

    Full decision

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

    Highlighted: Outcome (5)Matter of X citation
    Decision header
    U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services · Non-Precedent Decision of the Administrative Appeals Office · Date: AUG. 24, 2023 · In Re: 22064652 · Motion on Administrative Appeals Office Decision · Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver)

    The Petitioner seeks classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree. See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 203(b)(2), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(2). The Petitioner also seeks a national interest waiver ofthe job offer requirement that is attached to this EB-2 immigrant classification. See section 203(b )(2)(B)(i) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b )(2)(B)(i). U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services may grant this discretionary waiver of the required job offer, and thus of a labor certification, when it is in the national interest to do so.

    The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the petition. Although the record establishes that the Petitioner qualifies for classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree, in relevant part the Director concluded that the record does not establish that the proposed endeavor has national importance. We dismissed a subsequent appeal. The matter is now before us on combined motions to reopen and reconsider.

    The Petitioner bears the burden ofproof to demonstrate eligibility by a preponderance ofthe evidence. Matter of Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369, 375-76 (AAO 2010). Upon review, we will dismiss the motions.

    After the appeal decision, the Petitioner submitted two additional Forms I-290B, Notice of Appeal or Motion, indicating that the subsequent filings each were appeals. However, the submissions clarified that the Petitioner intended the subsequent filings to be combined motions to reopen and motions to reconsider. After filing the additional Forms I-290B, the Petitioner further clarified that the instant submission is a duplicate and he requested that we "consolidate the filings and adjudge accordingly." Therefore, we address the merits of the submissions in our decision on the previously submitted combined motions, In Re: 22046022, and we will dismiss the instant submission as moot.

    ORDER: The motion to reopen is dismissed.

    FURTHER ORDER: The motion to reconsider is dismissed.