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. § l 153(b)(2).
The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the Petitioner had not established that a waiver of the required job offer, and thus of the labor certification, would be in the nationalinterest. TheDirectoralsodismissedthesubsequentlyfiledmotiontoreconsider. Thematter is now before us on appeal.
On appeal, the Petitioner asserts that the Director did not fully adjudicate the issues and 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. Upon de nova review, we agree with the Petitioner that the Director's decision is insufficient for review and will remand the matter to the Director for further action and consideration.
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]he Attorney General may, when the Attorney 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 matterofdiscretion , grantanationalinterestwaiverifthepetitionerdemonstrates: (1)thattheforeign 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 beneficialtotheUnitedStatesto waivetherequirementsofajobofferandthusofalaborce1iification. See Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 888-91, for elaboration on these three prongs.
Analysis
A. Member of the Professions Holding an Advanced Degree
In order to show an individual is a professional holding an advanced degree, the petition must be accompanied by "[a]n official academic record showing that the alien has a United States advanced degree ora foreign equivalent degree." 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(i)(A). Although the Director's decision did not address this issue, the Petitioner's Ph.D. in chemistry from IUniversity establishes that he is a member of the professions holding an advanced degree.
B. National Interest Waiver
The remaining issue is whether the Petitioner has established that a waiver of the requirement of a job offer, and thus a labor certification, would be in the national interest.
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 discretionary in nature).
Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. 884 (AAO 2016). eligibility for EB-2 classification, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) may, as a Dhanasarstates that after a petitioner has established p. 3 1. Substantial Merit and National Importance ofthe Proposed Endeavor At the time of filing, the Petitioner held the position of postdoctoral research associate in the division of Chemical Biology and Medicinal Chemistry! of thel I SchoolofPharmacyattheUniversity where hespecializesin the field of medicinal chemistry and is responsible for the "[d]evelopment of chemical probes and synthesis of small molecule inhibitors for understudied protein kinases."
To evaluate whether the Petitioner's proposed endeavor satisfies the national importance requirement we look to evidence documenting the "potential prospective impact" of his work. The Director's decision, however, did not render a determination as to whether the Petitioner satisfies prong one of the Dhanasar analytical framework.
2. Well Positioned to Advance the Proposed Endeavor
The Petitioner contends that his education, position, research experience, recommendation letters from others in the field, citation record,joumal ranking and impact factor, and research funding demonstrate that he is well positioned to advance his proposed endeavor. The Director's decision, however, did not include a sufficient analysis of the content of the letters or a proper discussion of the deficiencies in the remaining evidence presented under this prong ofthe Dhanasar framework.
Forexample,regardingthePetitioner'sclaimsoffundingfromtheNationalInstitutesofHealth(NIH), the Director concluded that the Petitioner did not "provide evidence showing that his contribution was afactorinreceivingthegrants." InDhanasar,weexplainedthat:
[T]he record includes documentation that the petitioner played a significant role in projects funded by grants from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration ("NASA") and the Air Force Research Laboratories ("AFRL") within DOD. Thus, the significance of the petitioner's research in his field is corroborated by evidence of peer and government interest in his research, as well as by consistent government funding of the petitioner's research projects.
In addition, the record established that Dr. Dhanasar "initiated" or was "the primary award contact on several funded grant proposals" and that he was "the only listed researcher on many of the grants." Id. at 893, n.11. Here as evidence of the recei t of funding, the Petitioner provided a document entitled Not onl does it not include the Petitioner's name, but it lists three other individuals f r o m among others, as the recipients of grants.
3. Balancing Factors to Determine Waiver's Benefit to the United States
The Director's decision listed a number of factors that USCIS may consider in determining whether, on balance, it would be beneficial to the United States to waive the requirement of a job offer and thus of a labor certification, but did not sufficiently evaluate the Petitioner's arguments and evidence as they relate to these factors.
Conclusion
In light of the above, we are remanding the petition for the Director to properly apply all three prongs of the Dhanasar analytical framework.
ORDER: The decision of the Director is withdrawn. The matter is remanded for the entry of a new decision consistent with the foregoing analysis.