The Petitioner, a general and operations manager, seeks classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree. See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 203(b)(2), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b )(2). The Petitioner also seeks a national interest waiver ofthe job offer requirement that is attached to this EB-2 immigrant classification. See section 203(b )(2)(B)(i) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b )(2)(B)(i). U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) may grant this discretionary waiver of the required job offer, and thus of a labor certification, when it is in the national interest to do so.
The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the petition, concluding that although the Petitioner qualified for classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree, she had not established 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. 8 C.F.R. § 103.3.
The Petitioner bears the burden ofproof to demonstrate eligibility by a preponderance ofthe evidence. Matter ofChawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369, 375-76 (AAO 2010). We review the questions in this matter de novo. Matter of Christo 's, Inc., 26 l&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, 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. Section 203(b )(2)(B)(i) of the Act. 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. 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 Dhanasar, 26 l&N Dec. 884 (AAO 2016). Dhanasar states that U.S. Citizenship and Immigration p. 2 Services (USCIS) may, as matter of discretion, 1 grant a national interest waiver of the job offer, and thus the labor certification, to a petitioner classified in the EB-2 category ifthe petitioner demonstrates that (1) the noncitizen's proposed endeavor has both substantial merit and national importance; (2) the noncitizen is well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor; and (3) that on balance it would be beneficial to the United States to waive the requirements ofa job offer and thus ofa labor certification. The first prong, substantial merit and national importance, focuses on the specific endeavor the noncitizen proposes to undertake. The endeavor's merit may be demonstrated in a range of areas 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. The second prong shifts the focus from the proposed endeavor to the noncitizen. To determine whether the noncitizen 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, progress towards achieving the proposed endeavor, and the interest of potential customers, users, investors, or other relevant entities or individuals are also key considerations.
The third prong requires the petitioner to demonstrate that, on balance of applicable factors, it would be beneficial to the United States to waive the requirements of a job offer and thus of a labor certification. USCIS may evaluate factors such as whether, in light of the nature of the noncitizen' s qualification or the proposed endeavor, it would be impractical either for the noncitizen to secure a job offer or for the petitioner to obtain a labor certification; whether, in light of the nature of the noncitizen's qualification or the proposed endeavor, it would be impractical either for the noncitizen to secure a job offer or for the 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 noncitizen's contributions; and whether the national interest in the noncitizen's contributions is sufficiently urgent to warrant forgoing the labor certification process. Each ofthe factors considered must, taken together, indicate that on balance it would be beneficial to the United States to waive the requirements of a job offer and thus of a labor certification.
Analysis
In her initial description of the proposed endeavor, the Petitioner stated that she seeks to work as a general operations manager in the United States where she will "contribute to the overall improvement of American corporations, essentially by providing such entities with knowledge on how to structure and execute strategic factors, as it relates to balance sheet and cashflow optimizations." She further stated that she intends to create and develop a chain of healthy fast-food restaurants that will help the United States fight obesity. But in response to the Director's request for evidence (RFE), the Petitioner's proposed endeavor shifted to plans to continue her career in the United States as a financial analyst in order to enhance the financial health of U.S. companies. The Petitioner explained that her work would now include improving a company's business and investment uncertainties by providing 1 See also Flores v. Garland, 72 F.4th 85, 88 (5th Cir. 2023) (joining the Ninth, Eleventh, and D.C. Circuit Courts (and Third in an unpublished decision) in concluding that USCIS' decision to grant or deny a national interest waiver to be discretionary in nature). p. 3 knowledge on how to structure and execute strategic operations in the most cost-efficient way. On appeal, the Petitioner states that her proposed endeavor involves, "entrepreneurial endeavors to provide services to a broad range of business subjects within the industry." She mentions that her proposed endeavor will be to offer her expertise as a general and operations manager. The Petitioner also maintains that her mission is to "connect customers with sustainable, healthy food options in the fast-casual dining sector. Her company aims to lead in this segment while empowering employees and supporting local communities."
The Director found that the Petitioner qualifies as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree. The remaining issue to be determined 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. For the reasons discussed below, we conclude that the Petitioner has not sufficiently demonstrated the national importance of her proposed endeavor under the first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework.
On appeal, the Petitioner argues that the Director did not apply the proper standard of proof and instead imposed a stricter standard. The Petitioner further contends that the Director erroneously applied the law and makes general assertions that the Director did not give "due regard" to the evidence submitted. The Petitioner also highlights the evidence submitted in support of the petition and in response to the RFE to underscore the sufficiency of the submitted evidence, and maintains that she submitted evidence to demonstrate the national importance of her proposed endeavor.
In determining whether the proposed endeavor has national importance, we consider its potential prospective impact. 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." See Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. In Dhanasar, we further 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." 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.
To evaluate whether the Petitioner's proposed endeavor satisfies the national importance requirement we look to evidence documenting the "potential prospective impact" of the Petitioner's work. Here, the Petitioner's description of her proposed endeavor consists alternatively of being a general operations manager, working as a financial analyst, and creating and developing a chain of healthy fast-food restaurants. However, it is not possible to determine the substantial merit and national importance of an endeavor when a Petitioner cannot consistently articulate the nature of the endeavor. Over the course of this petition's pendency the Petitioner's proposed endeavor has transitioned from general operations manager to financial analyst and then back to general operations manager. The Petitioner has also stated at some points over the petition's pendency, but not others, that she wants to be an entrepreneur and open 12 franchised restaurants that offer healthy fast foods. She does not address the meandering and evolving nature of her description. But without a stable and consistent description of her proposed endeavor, we cannot analyze it under the Dhanasar framework because we lack the baseline understanding of her proposal's actual nature that is necessary to undertake such an analysis.
For example, because we have differing iterations of the proposed endeavor, we cannot conduct an analysis into whether it holds substantial merit and national importance, let alone conclude such an analysis in the Petitioner's favor. Nor can the Petitioner be appropriately evaluated for how well she is situated to advance the proposed endeavor when its substance is not evident. And the absence of a well-defined proposed endeavor renders balancing the benefit to the United States to waiving the job offer requirement and consequently a labor certification impossible. The Dhanasar framework cannot be applied to dueling proposed endeavors. A petitioner must identify the specific endeavor they propose to undertake. See Matter ofDhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889.
We therefore conclude that the Petitioner did not submit persuasive evidence to support a finding of substantial merit and national importance, and thus did not meet the first prong of the Dhanasar framework. The Petitioner bears the burden to both affirmatively establish eligibility under the Dhanasar framework, of which substantial merit is one piece, and establish her eligibility by a preponderance of the evidence. See Matter ofChawathe, 25 I&N Dec. at 376.
Since the identified basis for denial is dispositive of the Petitioner's appeal, we decline to reach and hereby reserve the Petitioner's appellate arguments regarding her eligibility under the second and third prongs. 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 of L-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
As the Petitioner has not met the Dhanasar analytical framework's requisite first prong, we conclude that she has not established that she eligible 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.