The Petitioner, a computer scientist researching artificial intelligence (Al) applications in healthcare, seeks classification under the employment-based, second-preference (EB-2) immigrant visa category and a waiver of the category's job offer requirement. See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 203(b )(2)(B)(i), 8 U.S.C. § l l 53(b )(2)(B)(i). U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has discretion to excuse job offers in this category - and thus related requirements for certifications from the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) - if petitioners demonstrate that waivers of these U.S.-worker protections would be "in the national interest." Id.; see also Poursina v. USCIS, 936 F.3d 868, 872 (9th Cir. 2019) (holding that the authority to grant or deny national-interest waivers is discretionary in nature).
Service Center Operations (SCOPS) denied the petition. SCOPS found that the Petitioner qualified for the requested immigrant visa category as a member of the professions holding an "advanced degree" and demonstrated that her proposed U.S. work had "substantial merit" and that she is "well positioned" to advance it. But SCOPS concluded that she did not: sufficiently describe her proposed U.S. work; demonstrate its "national importance;" or establish a waiver's overall benefit to the United States. On appeal, the Petitioner contends that SCOPS overlooked evidence and misjudged her work's importance.
The Petitioner bears the burden of demonstrating eligibility for the requested benefit by a preponderance of the evidence. Matter of Chawathe, 25 l&N Dec. 369, 375-76 (AAO 2010).
Exercising de novo appellate review, see Matter of Christo 's, Inc., 26 I&N Dec. 537, 537 n.2 (AAO 2015), we conclude that she sufficiently detailed her proposed U.S. endeavor, established its national importance, and demonstrated a waiver's overall benefit to the United States. We will therefore sustain the appeal.
Law
To establish eligibility for national interest waivers, petit10ners must first demonstrate their qualifications for the EB-2 category, either as advanced degree professionals or aliens of "exceptional ability" in the sciences, arts, or business. Section 203(b )(2)(A) of the Act. To protect jobs for U.S. workers, this immigrant visa category usually requires prospective U.S. employers to offer aliens work p. 2 and to obtain DOL certifications to permanently employ them in the country. See section 212( a)(5)(D) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(5)(D). Petitioners may avoid the job offer/labor certification requirements by demonstrating that waivers of the U.S.-worker protections would be "in the national interest." Section 203(b )(2)(B)(i) of the Act.
Neither the Act nor regulations define the term "national interest." So, to adjudicate these waiver requests, we have established a framework. If otherwise qualified as advanced degree professionals or aliens of exceptional ability, petitioners may warrant waivers of the job-offer/labor certification requirements by demonstrating that:
- Their proposed U.S. work has "substantial merit" and "national importance;"
- They are "well positioned" to advance their intended endeavors; and
- On balance, waivers of the job-offer/labor certification requirements would benefit the United States.
Matter ofDhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. 884, 889-91 (AAO 2016); see generalZv 6 USCIS Policy Manual F.(5)(D)(l), www.uscis.gov/policy-manual.
Analysis
The record supports the Petitioner's qualifications for the requested immigrant visa category as an advanced degree professional. She also demonstrated that her proposed U.S. work has substantial merit and that she is well positioned to advance it. We will now review SCOPS' findings regarding her description of the venture, its national importance, and a waiver's overall benefit to the United States.
A. The Proposed Endeavor
The term "endeavor" is more specific than the general occupation; a petitioner should offer details not only as to what the occupation normally involves, but what types of work the person proposes to undertake specifically within that occupation. For example, while engineering is an occupation, the explanation of the proposed endeavor should describe the specific projects and goals, or the areas of engineering in which the person will work, rather than simply listing the duties and responsibilities of an engmeer.
The Petitioner is currently researching the use of AI to develop "smart glasses" for visually impaired people. She stated: "My long-term goal is to contribute to the [AI] field ... as a research scientist in the United States, focusing on multimodal AI systems that integrate visual, linguistic, and spatial information." She said that she wants her work to address "societal challenges" and "improv[e] transparency in AI-driven healthcare."
In response to SCOPS' request for additional evidence (RFE), she elaborated on her proposed endeavor and submitted a written statement detailing two of her current research projects: the development of "smart glasses" for visually impaired people; and the development of AI healthcare models to "ensure that clinicians and patients can interpret AI decisions, enhancing the adoption of these technologies and diagnostics and treatment planning." These statements detail the types ofwork the Petitioner proposes to undertake within her stated occupation of"Computer Scientist" or "Research Scientist." The statements therefore sufficiently describe her proposed U.S. endeavor.
The Petitioner sufficiently described her proposed U.S. endeavor. We will therefore withdraw SCOPS' contrary finding.
B. National Importance
When determining whether a proposed endeavor has national importance, USCIS must focus on the particular venture, specifically on its "potential prospective impact." Matter ofDhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. "An undertaking may have national importance, for example, because it has national or even global implications within a particular field, such as those resulting from certain improved manufacturing processes or medical advances." Id.
Ultimately, if the evidence ofrecord demonstrates that the person's proposed endeavor has the significant potential to broadly enhance societal welfare or cultural or artistic enrichment, or to contribute to the advancement of a valuable technology or field of study, it may rise to the level of national importance.
explained that the proposed glasses include "a camera that will analyze the whole visual field in real time, infer associations between items, and determine how these relate to the user's objectives ( e.g., navigating a given destination [or] executing a specific activity)." The professor described the Petitioner's work as "essential for the success of the project" and stated that "[h]er contributions include developing advanced multimodal AI systems to provide navigation and object localization support for visually impaired users." The professor stated: "[The Petitioner] has been and continues to be a precious asset for this groundbreaking research that will potentially enhance the quality of life of up to 395 million visually impaired persons worldwide."
Thus, the letter - uncontroverted by any other evidence - indicates the potential significance of the Petitioner's research. See Matter of Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889 ("An undertaking may have national importance ... because it has national or even global implications within a particular field, such as those resulting from ... medical advances.") The record also shows that the smart glasses project received funding from a U.S. government agency and furthers another federal agency's plan for AI development and deployment by "[a]ccelerating scientific breakthroughs that could increase the quality and length of life." Thus, like the aerospace researcher in Dhanasar, the Petitioner has demonstrated her AI research's importance as it relates to U.S. strategic interests.
The Petitioner established that her proposed U.S. work has national importance. We will therefore withdraw SCOPS' contrary finding.
C. Waiver Benefits to the United States
A successful petitioner for a national interest waiver must demonstrate that "on balance, it would be beneficial to the United States to waive the requirements ofa job offer and thus ofa labor certification." Matter ofDhanasar, 26 T&N Dec. at 890.
On the one hand, Congress clearly sought to further the national interest by requiring job offers and labor certifications to protect the domestic labor supply. On the other hand, by creating the national interest waiver, Congress recognized that in certain cases the benefits inherent in the labor certification process can be outweighed by other factors that are also deemed to be in the national interest.
Id.
When balancing these competing interests, USCIS may evaluate factors such as:
- whether, in light of the nature of the alien's qualifications or proposed endeavor, it would be impractical either for them to secure a job offer or for a petitioner to obtain a labor certification;
- whether, even assuming that other qualified U.S. workers are available, the United States would still benefit from the alien's contributions; and
- whether the national interest in the alien's contributions is sufficiently urgent to warrant forgoing the labor certification process.
Id. at 890-91.
In Dhanasar, we concluded that, all things considered, waiving a job offer for the aerospace researcher would benefit the United States. Id. at 893. We noted that the researcher had three graduate degrees in relevant fields and "considerable experience and expertise in a highly specialized field." Id. Evidence also showed that research in his hypersonic propulsion field "holds significant implications for U.S. national security and competitiveness" and that "the repeated funding of research in which the petitioner played a key role indicates that government agencies ... have found his work on this topic to be promising and useful." Id.
The Petitioner here has considerable experience and expertise in the AI field. Also, as in Dhanasar, her field has significant implications for U.S. national security and competitiveness. Further, as in Dhanasar, U.S. government agencies have funded some of the research projects in which she has participated, suggesting that her work has promise and national usefulness.
Reviewing the specific facts of this case collectively, the factors favor a waiver. Thus, the Petitioner has demonstrated that, on balance, a job offer waiver would benefit the United States. We will therefore withdraw SCOPS' contrary finding.
Conclusion
The Petitioner sufficiently described her proposed U.S. endeavor, demonstrated its national importance, and established a national interest waiver's overall benefit to the United States. We will therefore withdraw SCOPS' contrary findings and approve the petition, including favorably exercising discretion to grant the waiver request.
ORDER: The appeal is sustained.