The Petitioner seeks second preference immigrant classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree or as an individual of exceptional ability, as well as a national interest waiver of the job offer requirement attached to this EB-2 classification. 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 the Petitioner had not established eligibility for 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 of proof 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 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, petitioners must 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. In addition, petitioners must show the merit of a discretionary waiver ofthe job offer requirement "in the national interest." Section 203(b )(2)(B)(i) ofthe Act. Matter ofDhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. 884, 889 (AAO 2016) provides that U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) may, as matter of discretion, 1 grant a national interest waiver if:
- 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 job offer requirement would benefit the United States.
Analysis
Regarding the national interest waiver, the first prong relates to substantial merit and national importance ofthe specific proposed endeavor. Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. The Petitioner intends: Through the opening and operation of the startup business, he will be able to provide Fitness and Well-Being consulting services to all sorts of companies and individuals in the United States, to ensure all individuals are well-advised regarding their physical and health habits, and that employees are in their best health state, thus leading the companies to obtain best results.
As it relates to substantial merit, the endeavor's merit may be shown in a range of areas such as business, entrepreneurialism, science, technology, culture, health, or education. Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. The Director determined the Petitioner established the substantial merit, but not the national importance, of the proposed endeavor.
In determining national importance, the relevant question is not the importance of the industry or profession in which the individual will work; instead, we focus on "the specific endeavor that the foreign national proposes to undertake." See Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. Although the Petitioner provided documentation regarding a wide range of topics, such as training supervision, fitness trainers and instructors, and health benefits of physical activity, the matter here is not whether these subjects are nationally important. Rather, the Petitioner must demonstrate the national importance of his specific, proposed endeavor of providing his services through his company in the I I Florida area. 2 In Dhanasar, we noted 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."Proposed endeavor too vague 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.
The Petitioner also contends that his endeavor falls within a STEM (science, technology, engineering, or mathematics) profession, stressing it falls within technology and entrepreneurism. With respect to the first prong, as in all cases, the evidence must demonstrate that a STEM endeavor has both substantial merit and national importance. 3 Many proposed endeavors that aim to advance STEM technologies and research, whether in academic or industry settings, not only have substantial merit in relation to U.S. science and technology interests, but also have sufficiently broad potential implications to demonstrate national importance.4 On the other hand, while proposed classroom teaching activities in STEM, for example, may have substantial merit in relation to U.S. educational interests, such activities, by themselves, generally are not indicative of an impact in the field of STEM education more broadly, and therefore generally would not establish their national importance. 5 Here, the Petitioner has not shown that his endeavor aims to advance STEM technologies and research or 2 The Petitioner's arguments and evidence relate to the substantial merit aspect of the proposed endeavor rather than the national importance part.
has broad implications rather than providing his limited professional services to his potential or prospective clients.
Similarly, the Petitioner also argues the submission ofletters, such as from Deputy Captain T- "where he reports that my work as a physical trainer for the police officers made all difference in that operation." Although the letters discuss the Petitioner's particular services, the letters do not show the broader impact of the Petitioner's work rather than limited to his specific clients, who employed or utilized him for his services.Benefits limited to an employer or its clients Moreover, the letters cover the Petitioner's prior work and accomplishments and relate more to the second prong rather than the first prong of the Dhanasar framework, which "shifts the focus from the proposed endeavor to the foreign national." Id. at 890. The issue here is whether the specific endeavor that he proposes to undertake has national importance under Dhanasar 's first prong.
Moreover, the record contains an expert opinion letter from A-J-R- who found the proposed endeavor to have national importance. However, the letter discusses the importance of various topics and initiatives rather than focusing on the national importance of the Petitioner's specific, proposed endeavor. In addition, the letter does not explain how the Petitioner's particular services or company would have broader implications for our country.
To evaluate whether the Petitioner's proposed endeavor satisfies the national importance requirement, we look to evidence documenting the "potential prospective impact" of the work. Id. at 889. Here, the Petitioner did not demonstrate how his services or business would largely influence the field and rise to the level of national importance.Past record does not show influence or success In Dhanasar, we determined 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. The record does not show through supporting documentation how his endeavor sufficiently extends beyond his prospective clients, to impact the field or the U.S. economy more broadly at a level commensurate with national importance.
Finally, while he provided a business plan for the proposed company, the Petitioner did not present any supporting evidence, corroborating the assertions and figures.Plan or projections not corroborated Moreover, the Petitioner did not demonstrate how his business plan's claimed revenue projections, even if credible or plausible, have offers substantial positive economic effects for our nation.Job creation or economic claims unsupported Although the business plan forecasts revenues from $58K in year 1 to $90K in year 3, the Petitioner did not establish the significance of this data to show that the benefits to the regional or national economy would reach the level of "substantial positive economic effects" contemplated by Dhanasar. Id. at 890. Furthermore, the business plan does not make any employment projections, demonstrating that such future staffing levels would provide substantial economic benefits to the I I Florida region or the U.S. p. 4 demonstrated eligibility for a national interest waiver. Further analysis ofthe Petitioner's eligibility under the second and third prongs outlined in Dhanasar, therefore, would serve no meaningful purpose, as well as a review of the Petitioner's qualification for the underlying immigrant classification. 6
Conclusion
As the Petitioner has not met the requisite first prong ofthe Dhanasar analytical framework, we conclude the Petitioner has not demonstrated eligibility for or otherwise merits a national interest waiver as a matter of discretion. 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.