The Petitioner seeks second preference immigrant classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree, as well as a national interest waiver ofthe job offer requirement attached to this EB-2 classification. See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section203(b)(2), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(2).
The Director o ftheNebraskaService Center denied the petition, concluding that the Petitioner qualified for classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree, but that he had not established that a waiver of the required job offer, and thus of the labor certification, would be in the national interest.
On appeal, the Petitioner asserts that he is eligible for a national interest waiver.
In these proceedings, it is the petitioner's burden to establish eligibility for the immigration benefit sought. Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361; Matter ofChawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369,375 (AAO 2010). Upon de nova 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. Because this classification requires that the individual's services be sought by a U.S. employer, a separate showing is required to establish that a waiver of the job offer requirement is in the national interest.
Section 203(b) of the Act sets out this sequential framework:
(2) Aliens who are members of the professions holding advanced degrees or aliens of exceptional ability. - p. 2 (A) In general. - Visas shall be made available ... to qualified immigrants who are members of the professions holding advanced degrees or their equivalent or who because of their exceptional ability in the sciences, arts, or business, will substantially benefit prospectively the national economy, cultural or educational interests, or welfare ofthe United States, and whose services in the sciences, arts, professions, or business are sought by an employer in the United States.
(B) Waiver ofjob offer-
(i)Nationalinterestwaiver.... [T]heAttorneyGeneralmay,whentheAttorney General deems it to be in the national interest, waive the requirements of subparagraph (A) that an alien's services in the sciences, arts, professions, or business be sought by an employer in the United States.
While neither the statute nor the pertinent regulations define the term "national interest," we set forth a framework for adjudicating national interest waiver petitions in the precedent decision Matter of of discretion , grant a national interest waiver if the petitioner demonstrates: (1) that the foreign national's proposed endeavor has both substantial merit and national importance; (2) that the foreign national is well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor; and (3) that, on balance, it would be beneficialtotheUnitedStates to waivetherequirementsofajobofferandthusofalaborcertification.
The first prong, substantial merit and national impmiance, focuses on the specific endeavor that the foreignnationalproposestoundertake. Theendeavor'smeritmaybedemonstratedinarangeofareas 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.
Thesecondprongshiftsthefocusfromtheproposedendeavortotheforeignnational. Todetermine whether he or she is well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor, we consider factors including, but not limited to: the individual's education, skills, knowledge and record of success in related or similar efforts; a model or plan for future activities; any progress towards achieving the proposed endeavor; and the interest of potential customers, users, investors, or other relevant entities or individuals.
The third prong requires the petitioner to demonstrate that, on balance, it would be beneficial to the UnitedStatestowaivetherequirementsofajobofferandthusofalaborcertification. Inperforming this analysis, USCIS may evaluate factors such as: whether, in light of the nature of the foreign national's qualifications or the proposed endeavor, it would be impractical either for the foreign national to secure a job offer or for the petitioner too btain a labor ce1iification; whether, even assuming Inannouncingthisnewframework,wevacatedourpriorprecedentdecision,MatterofNew YorkStateDepartmentof Transportation, 22 I&NDec. 215 (Act. Assoc. Comm'r 1998) (NYSDOT).
See also Poursina v. USCJS, No. 17-16579, 2019 WL 4051593 (Aug. 28, 2019) (finding USCIS' decision to grant or deny a nationalinterestwaiverto be discretionaiy in nature).
Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. 884 (AAO 2016). eligibility for EB-2 classification, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) may, as matter Dhanasarstates that after a petitioner has established p. 3 that other qualified U.S. workers are available, the United States would still benefit from the foreign national' s contributions; and whether the national interest in the foreign national' s contributions is sufficiently urgent to warrant forgoing the labor certification process. In each case, the factor(s) considered must, taken together, indicate that on balance, it would be beneficial to the United States The Director concluded that the Petitioner qualifies as a member o f the professions holding an advanced degree. TheremainingissuetobedeterminediswhetherthePetitionerhasestablishedthatawaiverof the requirement of a job offer, and thus a labor certification, would be in the national interest.
The Director determined that the Petitioner "failed to provide a detailed description of the proposed endeavor." OntheFormI-140,ImmigrantPetitionforAlienWorker,thePetitionerdidnotcompleteany of the information in Part 6 "Basic Information About the Proposed Employment" or submit the required sections ofeither ETA Form 9089, Application for Permanent Employment Certification, or Form ETA- 750 Part B, Application for Alien Employment Certification. In response to the Director's request for evidence, the Petitioner provided a "Personal Statement," which indicated that he is "uniquely qualified to share knowledge and expertise through a teaching role and/or a management position in a U.S. company" and that with a "permanent residence permit, [he] can teach and/or work in any U.S. state where it is needed." He also stated that his "next step from [his] Master's in Computer Information Systems degree [is] a Ph.D. [in] Leadership in Information Technology" which "will better equip [him] to effectively assume a role to combat cyberattacks at a corporate level, working closely with the U.S. government cybersecurity programs." The Petitioner also provided a completed ETA-750 Pait B which lists the "Occupation in which Alien is Seeking Work" as Business Teachers, Postsecondary. In addition, the Petitioner provided a letter from I Iwhich indicated that the Petitioner was working as a Financial Data Analyst/Accountant.
On appeal, although the Petitioner focuses on his "inten[t] to teach business courses in post-secondazy In determining whether an individual qualifies for a national interest waiver, we must rely on the SeeDhanasar, 26l&NDec. at 888-91, forelaboration onthesethreeprongs.
WenotethatthePetitionersubmittedadditionalevidenceinsupportofhisappealonSeptember2,2020. Hisappealwas filedonMay 18,2020. ThePetitionerhastheburdenofprooftoestablisheligibilityfortherequestedbenefitatthetime of filing. See 8 C.F.R. § I03.2(6)(1); see also Matter ofKatigbak, 14 T&N Dec. 45, 49 (Comm'r 1971) (providing that "Congress did not intend that a petition that was properly denied because the beneficia1y was not at that time qualified be subsequentlyapprovedatafuturedatewhenthebeneficiaiymaybecomequalifiedunderanewsetoffacts."). Iberri:re we will not consider evidence, such as the Petitioner'sjobofferto be a volunteer-instructor at the Universityofl I that occurred afterthe date offiling.
It is a !so unclear from the record whether the Petitioner intends to continue his employment as a Financial Data Analyst/Accountant. On appeal, the Petitioner states that "[through][m]yjob ... as [a] Financial Analyst, I am gaining newbusinessexperiencesandinsightssignificantlyusefulinteachingattheuniversitylevel." Hefurtherstatesthat,"[i]n to waive the requirements of a job offer and thus of a labor certification.
Analysis
institutions," he fails to address the Director's concerns regarding the proposed endeavor. we held that a petitioner must identify "the specific endeavor that the foreign national proposes to undertake." Id. at 889. specific proposed endeavor to determine whether (l) it has both substantial merit and national In Dhanasar, p. 4 importance and (2) the foreign national is well positioned to advance it under the Dhanasar analysis. Because the Petitioner has not provided consistent information regarding his proposed endeavor, we cannot conclude that he meets either the first or second prong, or that he has established eligibility for a national interest waiver.
Even if we were to assume that the Petitioner's specific endeavor is that of a teacher, in Dhanasarwe determined 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. Id. at 893. Similarly, in this matter, the record does not show that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor stands to sufficiently extend beyond his potential students to impact either his field or the nation's fiscal condition more broadly at a level commensurate with national importance.
Furthermore, the Petitioner has not demonstrated that the specific endeavor he proposes to undertake has significant potential to employ U.S. workers or otherwise offers substantial positive economic effectsforournation.Job creation or economic claims unsupported WithoutsufficientinformationorevidenceregardinganyprojectedU.S.economic impact or job creation attributable to his future work, the record does not show that benefits to the U.S. regional or national economy resulting from the Petitioner's endeavor would reach the level of "substantial positive economic effects" contemplated by Dhanasar. Id. at 890. Accordingly, the Petitioner's proposed work does not meet the first prong of the Dhanasar framework.
Since these issues are dispositive of the Petitioner's appeal, we decline to reach and hereby reseive the appellate arguments regarding the remaining issues. See 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");see also 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).
Conclusion
The appeal will be dismissed for the above stated reasons, with each considered as an independent and alternate basis for the decision. ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. the U.S. , the opportunity to have more part-time job s simultaneously together is possible only to tho se who dare to serze the opportune time."