The Petitioner seeks employment-based second preference (EB-2) immigrant classification as an individual of exceptional ability, 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).
The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the petition. The Director concluded that the Petitioner does not qualify for second preference immigrant classification as an individual of exceptional ability. The Director also concluded that the Petitioner did not establish a waiver of the job offer requirement, 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 l&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. While neither the statute nor the pertinent regulations define the term "national interest," Matter ofDhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. 884 (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.
The first prong, substantial merit and national importance, focuses on the specific endeavor that the individual proposes to undertake. The endeavor's merit may be demonstrated in a range of areas 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. Id. at 889. See id. at 888-91 for elaboration on these three prongs.
Analysis
As noted above, the Director concluded that the Petitioner does not qualify for second preference immigrant classification as an individual of exceptional ability. The record does not clarify why the Director addressed whether the Petitioner may qualify for a national interest waiver ifhe was ineligible for second-preference classification. Because we nevertheless find that the record does not establish that a waiver ofthe requirement ofa job offer, and thus ofa labor certification, would be in the national interest, we reserve our opinion regarding whether the Petitioner satisfies second-preference eligibility criteria. See section 203(b )(2) ofthe Act; see also INS v. Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. 24, 25 (1976) ("courts and agencies are not required to make findings on issues the decision of which is unnecessary to the results they reach"); Matter ofL-A-C-, 26 I&N Dec. 516, 526 n.7 (BIA 2015) (declining to reach alternative issues on appeal where an applicant is otherwise ineligible).
The Petitioner described the endeavor as a plan to work as the chief executive officer for a startup business administration consulting services company with a "primary focus for the initial five years . . . on the fashion business sector, encompassing clothing, footwear, accessories, and related industries." The Petitioner submitted a business plan that indicates his startup business administration consulting services company would "offer[] a tailored consultancy specialized in strategic growth and marketing solutions for ... small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) facing challenges in adapting to the rapidly evolving market dynamics." The business plan generally indicates that the Petitioner's startup business administration consulting services company would be located at some unspecified location "in Florida" and that it "aims to operate attending clients from any part ofthe U.S. by offering physical and digital attendance." The business plan asserts that, in addition to employing himself as the chief executive officer, he would employ one "Jr. Consultant" and one "Commercial & Sales Assistant" in the first year ofoperations, for a total ofthree workers, increasing to a total of 17 workers in the fifth year of operations, including the following position titles: marketing manager, senior and junior consultants, commercial and sales manager, commercial and sales assistants, marketing analyst, back office manager, financial analyst, and human resources analyst. The business plan also informs that the workers would receive prorated annual wages ranging between $30,000 and $96,000, varying by position title, with scheduled increases based on years of employment.
The Petitioner also submitted documents providing generalized information regarding business, business administration, business administration consulting services, and similar topics. The Director determined that the proposed endeavor has substantial merit, as required in part by the first Dhanasar prong. See Matter of Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889-90. The Director also acknowledged the record contains the Petitioner's business plan and generalized information related to business administration consulting services. However, the Director observed that "the record does not convey an understanding of how the [P]etitioner's proposed employment activities stand to have a broader impact on the field, rising to the level of national importance."No broader implications shown The Director noted that the record does not establish whether the Petitioner's proposed endeavor "has implications beyond the current company, business partners, alliances, and/or unidentified clients at a level sufficient to demonstrate the national importance ofthe endeavor." The Director also observed that the record does not establish how "the employment of seventeen workers, or even potentially, at the demonstrated rate of pay would have substantial positive effects in the community" or otherwise demonstrate substantial positive economic effects.Job creation or economic claims unsupported Based on those and similar issues, the Director concluded the record does not establish whether the proposed endeavor may have national importance, as contemplated by the first Dhanasar prong. See id. The Director then determined that, although the record satisfies the second Dhanasar prong, it does not satisfy the third prong, of which all three must be met. See id. at 888-91.
On appeal, the Petitioner reiterates information already in the record, including copying and pasting information from the Petitioner's business plan into the appeal brief The Petitioner also reasserts on appeal that the proposed endeavor will have national importance because it will benefit the Petitioner's business administration consulting services company's clients and customers, his company plans to employ 17 workers within the first five years of operations, and both his company and its clients and customers will "generate more profits, needing to hire more employees, pay higher taxes, and purchase more local goods and services."
In determining national importance, the relevant question is not the importance of the industry, field, or profession in which an individual will work; instead, to assess national importance, we focus on "the speci fie endeavor that the [ non citizen] proposes to undertake" and "we consider its potential prospective impact," looking for "broader implications." Matter ofDhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. Dhanasar provided examples of endeavors that may have national importance, as required by the first prong, having "national or even global implications within a particular field, such as those resulting from certain improved manufacturing processes or medical advances" or those with "significant potential to employ U.S. workers or ... other substantial positive economic effects, particularly in an economically depressed area." Id. at 889-90.
We first note that the documents in the record providing generalized information regarding business, business administration, business administration consulting services, and similar topics, are material to the issue of whether the proposed endeavor may have substantial merit, as required in part by the first Dhanasar prong. See id. However, generalized information in the record that does not address the Petitioner, the specific endeavor he proposes to undertake, and how the specific endeavor may have the type of broader implications indicative of national importance are immaterial to that issue, as contemplated by the first Dhanasar prong.Proposed endeavor too vague Because such generalized information is immaterial to the issue of whether the specific endeavor the Petitioner proposes to undertake may have national or even p. 4 global implications within a particular field, such as those resulting from certain manufacturing processes or medical advances, or significant potential to employ U.S. workers or other substantial positive economic effects, particularly in an economically depressed area, and because that issue is dispositive here, we need not address them further. See id.
The record establishes that the proposed endeavor may benefit to varying degrees the Petitioner, his startup business administration consulting services company, its employees, and its potential clients and customers, operating at unspecified locations "at any part of the U.S." However, the record does not establish how the proposed endeavor of providing business administration consulting services to unspecified SMEs in "clothing, footwear, accessories, and related industries" may have national importance. Moreover, because the record does not further specify where, in particular, the Petitioner's company's potential clients and customers would be located, it does not establish which locations the Petitioner purports would receive substantial positive economic effects as a result of his proposed endeavor, undermining meaningful analysis of the issue.No interest from users, customers or investors
Neither the Petitioner's business plan nor the remainder of the record establish how the Petitioner's endeavor to provide business administration consulting services to small- and medium-sized clothing, footwear, and accessories enterprises may have national or even global implications within the field of business administration, business administration consulting services, apparel, retail, or any other particular field. For example, the record does not establish that the proposed endeavor would create national or even global implications within any particular field, such as those resulting from certain improved manufacturing processes or medical advances, as opposed to merely providing services similar to those already provided by other business administration consulting services companies. See id.
In tum, neither the Petitioner's business plan nor the remainder of the record establish how employing 1 7 workers, including the Petitioner, in the positions noted above, with annual wages ranging between $30,000 and $96,000 with certain scheduled increases, in some unspecified location broadly indicated "in Florida" demonstrates significant potential to employ U.S. workers or other substantial positive economic effects, particularly in an economically depressed area. See id. For example, without establishing the location in Florida in which the potential employees would work, the record does not provide relevant context for the significance of employing an additional worker in the respective positions, or whether the corresponding wage may constitute a substantial positive economic effect in that locale somewhere in Florida. Relatedly, although the Petitioner discusses indirect jobs his proposed endeavor may create by virtue of his company providing business administration consulting services, the record also does not establish the locations in which he purports his endeavor would indirectly create jobs, the nature of the jobs that may be created, the wages that those workers would receive, and other information that may indicate whether those economic effects may be substantial in those uncertain areas. See id.
In summation, the Petitioner has not established that the proposed endeavor has national importance, as required by the first Dhanasar prong; therefore, he is not eligible for a national interest waiver. We reserve our opinion regarding whether the record satisfies the second or third Dhanasar prong. See INS v. Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. at 25; see also Matter ofL-A-C-, 26 I&N Dec. at 526 n.7. As noted above, we also reserve our opinion regarding whether the Petitioner satisfies second-preference p. 5 eligibility criteria. See section 203(b)(2) of the Act; see also INS v. Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. at 25; Matter ofL-A-C-, 26 I&N Dec. at 526 n.7.
Conclusion
As the Petitioner has not met the requisite first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework, we conclude that the Petitioner has not established eligibility for, or otherwise merits, a national interest waiver as a matter of discretion.
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.