The Petitioner seeks second preference immigrant classification (EB-2) as an advanced degree professional.' See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 203(b)(2), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(2) (2022). In a November 2022 statement, she indicated that she intends to come to the United States to create a business in the field of home health care. She also seeks a national interest waiver of the job offer requirement that is attached to this EB-2 immigrant classification. See section 203(b )(2)(B)(i) of the Act. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) 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, concluding that the record did not establish the Petitioner's eligibility for a national interest waiver. Specifically, the Director determined that the Petitioner failed to demonstrate her proposed endeavor is of national importance or that on balance, it would be beneficial to the United States to waive the required job offer, and thus of a labor certification. The matter is now before us on appeal. 8 C.F.R. § 103.3 (2023).
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 Christa's, Inc., 26 I&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 immigrant 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. 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 1 The Petitioner submitted another EB-2 petition and national interest waiver in 2019. The Director of the Texas Service Center denied that petition and waiver request in February 2022. Subsequently, we dismissed the appeal in October 2022. p. 2 Dhanasar, 26 T&N Dec. 884 (AAO 2016), provides the framework for adjudicating national interest waiver petitions. Matter ofDhanasar states that USCIS may, as matter of discretion,2 grant a national interest waiver ifthe petitioner demonstrates that:
- The proposed endeavor has both substantial merit and national importance;
- The individual is well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor; and
- On balance, waiving the requirements of a job offer and a labor certification would benefit the United States.
Matter ofDhanasar, 26 T&N Dec. at 889-91.
Analysis
The Director found that the Petitioner qualifies for the EB-2 classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree. See 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(i)(B) (2022). The Director based the determination on evidence of the Petitioner's bachelor's degree in nursing, which she obtained in Brazil, and letters from her former employers, discussing her at least 5 years of progressive postbaccalaureate experience as a nurse. 3 Notwithstanding this finding, the Director concluded that she did not establish eligibility for a national interest waiver.Five years of progressive experience not documented Specifically, the Director explained in the denial that while the Petitioner has demonstrated the substantial merit of her proposed endeavor, she has not shown that "[her] proposed endeavor is of national importance," or 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."Did not show the waiver outweighs labor certification
Upon de novo review, we agree with the Director's finding, concluding that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor does not satisfy the national importance element under the first prong of the Matter of Dhanasar framework. Id., 26 I&N Dec. at 889-90. Ifthe Petitioner does not meet the first prong, the record is dispositive in finding that she is ineligible for the national interest waiver, and we need not address the second and third prongs under the Matter ofDhanasar framework.
As explained in the Director's denial, the first prong - substantial merit and national importance -focuses on the specific endeavor that the Petitioner proposes to undertake in the United States. In determining whether the proposed endeavor has national importance, we consider its potential prospective impact. Matter ofDhanasar, 26 l&N Dec. at 889. We noted in Matter ofDhanasar 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.
In a November 2022 statement, the Petitioner stated that her "proposed endeavor will be to create a business in the field of Home Health Care that will offer the following services: general and followup care for patients, personal care, palliative care, and emergency and urgent care for patients." She indicated that her business "will initially operate inl IFlorida" and will expand "to other areas whose demand for Home Health Care services is growing." In support of her petition, the Petitioner has offered a business plan, indicating that the business will provide services "in patients' /clients' own homes" and will be a franchise by third year of its operations. Pages 26 through 28 and 52 of the business plan provide that the business will hire eight employees, including one administrative assistant, three home health aides, two personal care aides, and two nursing assistants; will pay "$233,000.00 ... in wages annually"; will have "projected revenue of $3,951,187.20 for [the first] 5 years"; and will "creat[e]/maintain[] more than 54 indirect jobs." The business plan also notes that industry studies and reports have confirmed "excellent expectations for the intense and constant revenue growth for the Home Care Providers sector" and "relevance and excellent expectations for the humanized care sector at home."
In support of her petition, the Petitioner has presented recommendation letters from individuals who have worked with her and who are knowledgeable about her abilities. For example, a November 2022 letter from a medical professional at ___________ in Brazil provides that the Petitioner has "show[n] an extensive capacity for knowledge of human behavior and performance" and is "qualified to work as a nurse and entrepreneur." A November 2022 letter from a plastic surgeon in Brazil "attest[s] to [the Petitioner's] skills in monitoring the patient's condition" and states that "her technical knowledge of nursing was always remarkable." A November 2022 letter from a nurse at _______
The evidence, including the Petitioner's statement, the business plan, and recommendation letters, confirms that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor is in an important field. As such, the Director concluded that she has demonstrated the substantial merit of her proposed endeavor. However, as explained, the relevant question is not the importance of a particular field in which the Petitioner will work; instead, to satisfy the first prong of the Matter of Dhanasar framework, the Petitioner must demonstrate that "the specific endeavor that [she] proposes to undertake" in the United States has national importance. Id., 26 I&N Dec. at 889-90. The record does not demonstrate that her proposed endeavor of establishing and operating a home health care business "has national or . . . global implications within a particular field, such as those resulting from certain improved manufacturing processes or medical advances." Id. at 889. Additionally, the record does not show that her proposed endeavor stands to sufficiently extend beyond her potential patients or clients, to impact the field or any other industries or the U.S. economy more broadly at a level commensurate with national importance. See Matter ofDhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 893 ( concluding 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).
Moreover, as the Director noted in the denial, the record "does not demonstrate that the [proposed] endeavor would generate a significant economic benefit to the United States or to any of the cities or states it would operate in through employment levels, business activity, or trade, such that it would rise to the level of national importance."Job creation or economic claims unsupported The Petitioner claims that her business will hire eight employees and has the potential to create "more than 54 indirect jobs." She also alleges that her business will pay $233,000 in wages annually and has the potential to have a total revenue of $3,951,187.20 within first five years ofits operations. She, however, has not established the business's "significant potential to employ U.S. workers or [that it] has other substantial positive economic effects, particularly in an economically depressed area." Matter ofDhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 890. Specifically, according to pages 15 and 16 of the business plan, "the number of people employed in the Home Health Services Industry Group has been growing at a rate of 1.52%, from 1.35 million in 2019 to 1.37 million in 2020" and that "U.S. revenue [for the home health services sector] is projected to be approximately $100 billion in 2024." This information, which reveals the industry's substantial size, does not support the Petitioner's claim that her proposed endeavor, including its potential employment and economic effects, will likely have "national or ... global implications within [the] particular field." Id. at 889.
Accordingly, we find that the Petitioner has not satisfied the first prong of the Matter ofDhanasar framework, and she has not demonstrated eligibility for a national interest waiver. As the identified reasons for dismissal are dispositive of the Petitioner's appeal, we decline to reach and hereby reserve remaining arguments concerning eligibility under the Matter of Dhanasar framework. See INS v. Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. 24, 25 (1976) (stating that "courts and agencies are not required to make findings on issues the decision of which is unnecessary to the results they reach"); see also Matter of L-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).
Conclusion
As the Petitioner has not met the requisite first prong of the Matter ofDhanasar analytical framework, we find that she has not established she is eligible for or otherwise merits a national interest waiver as a matter of discretion.
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.