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

Teacher

Education · decided 2023-07-31 · TSC · JUL312023_01B5203

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

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

  • 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 while the Petitioner did show that she was eligible for the EB-2 classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree, she did not establish that she was eligible for, and merited as a matter of discretion, a waiver that classification's job offer requirement. See in text

What the AAO decided

  • Accordingly, we will dismiss the motion to reopen and the motion to reconsider because they do not meet the applicable requirements. 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 (2 pages)

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 (9)Matter of X citation
    Decision header
    U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services · Non-Precedent Decision of the Administrative Appeals Office · Date: JUL. 31, 2023 · In Re: 27856178 · Motion on Administrative Appeals Office Decision · Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver)

    The Petitioner, a teacher, 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. § 1153(b)(2).

    The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the petition, concluding that while the Petitioner did show that she was eligible for the EB-2 classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree, she did not establish that she was eligible for, and merited as a matter of discretion, a waiver that classification's job offer requirement. We dismissed a subsequent appeal, as well as four combined motions to reopen and reconsider. In our most recent decision, we rejected the Petitioner's appeal ofour fourth motion decision because we do not have jurisdiction over appeals ofour decisions. The matter is now again 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 motion.

    A motion to reopen must state new facts and be supported by affidavits or other documentary evidence. 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(2). A motion to reconsider must state the reasons for reconsideration; be supported by any pertinent precedent decision to establish that the decision was based on an incorrect application of law or policy; and establish that the decision was incorrect based on the evidence in the record at the time ofthe decision. 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(3). As noted above, we rejected the Petitioner's appeal ofour fourth motion decision because we do not jurisdiction over appeals of our decisions. See AAO Practice Manual, Ch. 3.2(e), www.uscis.gov/aao-practice-manual. On motion, the Petitioner resubmits the project plan for her proposed "STEM Sanctuary Garden" and other documentation relating to events occurring after the initial filing of her petition. However, a petitioner must establish eligibility at the time of filing. 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(l).

    More importantly, the regulations make no provision for filing a motion to reopen or reconsider a rejected appeal. The scope of a motion is limited to "the prior decision" and "the latest decision in the proceeding," and here we rejected that prior appeal. 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(l)(i), (ii). When we reject p. 2 an appeal, the appeal does not retain a filing date, and there is no merits-based decision for us to review. See AAO Practice Manual, Ch. 4.5(a). Accordingly, we will dismiss the motion to reopen and the motion to reconsider because they do not meet the applicable requirements.

    ORDER: The motion to reopen is dismissed.

    FURTHER ORDER: The motion to reconsider is dismissed.