The Petitioner, an entrepreneur in the trucking and logistics industry, seeks classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree. See section 203(b )(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b )(2). The Petitioner also seeks a national interest waiver of the job offer requirement that is attached to this employment based second preference (EB-2) classification. See section 203(b )(2)(B)(i) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b )(2)(B)(i).
Service Center Operations (SCOPS) denied the petition, concluding although the Petitioner qualified as an advanced degree professional, she did not establish that 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 pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 103.3.
The Petitioner bears the burden ofproof to demonstrate eligibility by a preponderance ofthe evidence. Matter ofChawathe, 25 l&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 qualify for the underlying EB-2 visa classification, a petitioner must establish they are an advanced degree professional or an individual of exceptional ability in the sciences, arts, or business. Section 203(b )(2)(A) of the Act.
An advanced degree is any U.S. academic or professional degree or a foreign equivalent degree above that of a bachelor's degree. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(K)(2). A U.S. bachelor's degree or foreign equivalent degree followed by five years ofprogressive experience in the specialty is the equivalent of a master's degree. Id.
If a petitioner establishes eligibility for the underlying EB-2 classification, they must then demonstrate that they merit a discretionary waiver of the 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 the framework for adjudicating national interest waiver petitions. Dhanasar states that U.S. p. 2 Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) may, as matter of discretion, 1 grant a national interest waiver if the petitioner demonstrates that:
- The proposed endeavor has both substantial merit and national importance;
- The individual is well-positioned to advance their proposed endeavor; and
- On balance, waiving the job offer requirement would benefit the United States.
Id.
Analysis
The Petitioner's proposed endeavor is to establish a trucking business management and consulting services firm in Florida. The Petitioner explains that the company will offer "customized solutions that streamline and optimize operations, reduce costs, and boost profit by focusing on digital transformation, technological trends, and efficient business solutions."
A. EB-2 Classification
The Petitioner submitted her foreign master's degree, along with her academic transcripts and a credential evaluation indicating she possesses the equivalent to a U.S. master's degree in economics with finance and financial management. SCOPS determined the Petitioner qualified for EB-2 classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree. We agree. The only issue on appeal is whether she qualifies for and merits a waiver of the job offer requirement in the national interest.
B. Substantial Merit and National Importance
The first Dhanasar prong, substantial merit and national importance, focuses on the specific endeavor that the individual proposes to undertake. Id. The endeavor's merit may be demonstrated in a range of areas such as business, entrepreneurialism, science, technology, culture, health, or education. Id. SCOPS determined that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor was of substantial merit, and we agree. However, SCOPS concluded the Petitioner did not establish that her proposed endeavor has national importance.
In determining whether the proposed endeavor has national importance, we consider its potential prospective impact. Id. In Dhanasar, we noted that, in assessing national importance, "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." 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.
On appeal, the Petitioner contends SCOPS erred in determining that her proposed endeavor does not have national importance. The Petitioner explains that her endeavor "is of clear and far-reaching national importance because it addresses critical challenges in the U.S. trucking and logistics industry" and that her company will "modernize their administrative systems, optimize logistics planning, and adopt new technologies that increase productivity, reduce waste, and ensure compliance with safety and environmental regulations." The Petitioner provided a business plan describing the strategies her company intends to implement to remain competitive. However, the Petitioner does not explain how her proposed endeavor would offer benefits extending beyond her clients to impact the transportation field more broadly.No broader implications shown Furthermore, we acknowledge that the Dhanasar decision contemplates "[a]n 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. at 889. But the Petitioner has not established the extent to which her proposed endeavor's strategies in, for example, modernizing administrative systems, optimizing logistics planning, and adopting new technologies differ from or improves upon those already available and in use in the United States such that her proposed endeavor would have national or global implications within her field or for the United States.
In addition, the Petitioner highlights that her proposed endeavor has national importance because it aligns with government initiatives including The Biden-Harris Administration's Trucking Action Plan. However, merely working in an important field or profession is insufficient to establish the national importance of the proposed endeavor. Id. Instead, when determining whether the proposed endeavor has national importance, the relevant question is not the importance of the field, industry, or profession in which the individual will work; instead, we focus on the "the specific endeavor that the foreign national proposes to undertake." Id. Alignment with general national goals, in and of itself: does not necessarily establish that the Petitioner's endeavor rises to the level of national importance.Proposed endeavor too vague Thus, while we acknowledge that the trucking and logistics industry is important, this fact is insufficient to establish the national importance of her proposed endeavor.
The Petitioner also asserts that her endeavor will "support the creation of new jobs, professional training, and business opportunities, thereby contributing to national employment goals and equitable economic growth." However, the Petitioner has not submitted supporting evidence to demonstrate the specific endeavor she proposes to undertake has significant potential to employ U.S. workers or otherwise offers substantial positive economic effects for our nation.Job creation or economic claims unsupported Without sufficient information or evidence regarding any projected U.S. economic impact or job creation attributable to her future company, the record does not show that benefits to the 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.
We reviewed the opinion letter from A-C-M-, an associate professor at the ~--------~Support letters generic or unsupported
In addressing the first prong of the Dhanasar framework, the author is very general, significantly focuses on the importance of the trucking industry, the impact small business owners play in the U.S. economy, and national initiatives. However, the letter does not contain sufficient information and explanation of the Petitioner's proposed endeavor, nor does the record include adequate corroborating evidence, to show that the Petitioner's specific proposed work in the trucking and logistics industry offers broader implications in her field or substantial positive economic effects for our nation that rise to the level of national importance. The letter therefore is insufficient to establish the national p. 4 importance of the Petitioner's specific proposed U.S. work. See Matter o_f Caron Int'!, Inc., 19 I&N Dec. 791, 795 (Comm'r 1988).
Finally, we reviewed the Petitioner's letters of recommendation. However, the letters of recommendation add little probative value in establishing the Petitioner's eligibility under Dhanasar 's first prong. While the authors praise the Petitioner's skills, personal attributes, and past accomplishments, factors which relate more to the second prong, they do not discuss the Petitioner's specific proposed endeavor or the impact thereof
Conclusion
Because the Petitioner has not established eligibility under the first prong of the Dhanasar test, we need not address her eligibility under the remaining prongs, and we hereby reserve them. 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 alternate issues on appeal where an applicant is otherwise ineligible). The burden of proof is on the Petitioner to establish that she meets each eligibility requirement of the benefit sought by a preponderance of the evidence. Matter ofChawathe, 25 I&N Dec. at 375-376. The Petitioner has not done so here and, therefore, we conclude that she has not established eligibility for a national interest waiver as a matter of discretion.
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.
NOTICE: This constitutes the final decision in this matter. The filing of a motion will not postpone the effect ofthe decision. 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(l)(iv). Aliens who are not lawfully present, or otherwise inadmissible or deportable, may be subject to the commencement of removal proceedings under section 240 of the Act through the issuance of a Form I-862, Notice to Appear. Those proceedings may result in their removal from the United States and possible ineligibility for future visas or other immigration benefits.