The Petitioner, an entrepreneur in the field of physical education, 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 although the Petitioner qualified as an advanced degree professional, he 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. 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 l&N Dec. 537, 537 n.2 (AAO 2015). Upon de novo 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. Section 203(b )(2)(B)(i) of the Act. "Advanced degree" means any U.S. academic or professional degree or a foreign equivalent degree above that of baccalaureate. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2). A U.S. baccalaureate degree or a foreign equivalent degree followed by five years ofprogressive experience in the specialty shall be considered the equivalent of a master's degree. Id.
"Exceptional ability" in the sciences, arts, or business means a degree of expertise significantly above that ordinarily encountered in the sciences, arts, or business. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2). A petitioner must initially submit documentation that satisfies at least three of six categories of evidence. See 8 p. 2 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(ii)(A)-(F). 1 Meeting at least three criteria, however, does not, in and of itself: establish eligibility for this classification. We will then conduct a final merits determination to decide whether the evidence in its totality shows that they are recognized as having a degree of expertise significantly above that ordinarily encountered in the field. 2 Once a petitioner demonstrates eligibility as either a member of the professions holding an advanced degree or an individual of exceptional ability, 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 discretion3
, 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.
Analysis
A. EB-2 Visa Classification
As indicated above, the 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.
The Director determined that the Petitioner is a member ofthe professions holding an advanced degree. However, upon de novo review, we disagree.
The Petitioner provided a copy of his Brazilian Titulo de Licenciado in physical education and transcript indicating that he began his studies in January 2006 and completed them in February 2009, a period of three years. According to the American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers (AACRAO) Electronic Database for Global Education (EDGE)4 entry for the Titulo de Licenciado, it is a teaching qualification awarded after two to four years of academic study and only the four-year program is the foreign equivalent of a U.S. bachelor's degree.
While we acknowledge the submission of an academic evaluation concluding the Petitioner's Titulo de Licenciado is the foreign equivalent of a U.S. bachelor's degree, based upon the information in EDGE and the length of the program as reflected in the transcript, we question its accuracy.5 Accordingly, the evaluation holds little probative value in this matter.
Without a minimum of a U.S. bachelor's degree or foreign equivalent, the Petitioner cannot qualify as an advanced degree professional, regardless of whether he has at least five years of experience. Further, even if we determined his education is the equivalent of a U.S. bachelor's degree, the Petitioner has not sufficiently established that he has at least five years of post-baccalaureate experience in the specialty. The Petitioner provided three employment letters, none of which state whether he worked foll-time or part-time. Moreover, one of the letters was prepared by a co-worker and not the employer. As such, the letters do not meet the requirements of 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(i)(B).
For the above reasons, the Petitioner has not established eligibility for the EB-2 classification as an advanced degree professional and we withdraw the Director's determination on this issue. Moreover, since the evidence in the record does not establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the Petitioner is eligible for, or otherwise merits, a national interest waiver as a matter of discretion, we will reserve the issue of whether he qualifies for EB-2 classification as an individual of exceptional ability for future consideration should the need arise. 6 B. National Interest Waiver
According to his business plan, the Petitioner proposes to establish a martial arts academy in l .... Florida that will work with athletes with special needs and instructors. In addition, the Petitioner states that the academy will offer classes to children from low-income families, as well as war veterans. The first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework, 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, health, or education. Id. For example, endeavors related to research, pure science, and the furtherance of human knowledge may qualify. Id.
In her decision, the Director determined that the Petitioner did not provide sufficient detail regarding his proposed endeavor to show that it was of substantial merit. 7 We disagree and, therefore, withdraw the Director's conclusion.
Turning to the national importance of his endeavor, the Director concluded that the Petitioner did not establish that his proposed endeavor would prospectively impact the region or nation beyond its students. The Director reviewed and analyzed the Petitioner's claims including his business plan with employment creation assertions, recommendation letters, and industry reports and articles and discussed their deficiencies. On appeal, the Petitioner submits a brief which generally reiterates the benefits ofhis profession, his qualifications, and the claimed economic impacts ofhis proposed martial arts academy and contends that he has established the national importance of his proposed endeavor. He does not, however, provide any new evidence or arguments which overcome the Director's determination.
Therefore, we adopt and affirm the Director's decision as it relates to this prong. See Matter of Burbano, 20 I&N Dec. 872, 874 (BIA 1994); see also Giday v. INS, 113 F.3d 230, 234 (D.C. Cir. 1997) (noting that the practice of adopting and affirming the decision below has been "universally accepted by every other circuit that has squarely confronted this issue"); Chen v. INS, 87 F.3d 5, 8 (1st Cir. 1996) (joining eight U.S. Court of Appeals in holding the appellate adjudicators may adopt and affirm the decision below as long as they give "individualized consideration" to the case). Because the Petitioner has not established the national importance of his proposed endeavor as required by the first prong ofthe Dhanasar precedent decision, he has not demonstrated eligibility for a national interest waiver, as a matter of discretion. Since the identified basis for denial is dispositive of the Petitioner's appeal, we decline to reach and hereby reserve the Petitioner's appellate arguments regarding the two remaining Dhanasar prongs. See INS v. Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. 24, 25 (1976). ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.