The Petitioner, an entrepreneur, seeks employment-based second preference (EB-2) 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 classification. See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 203(b)(2), 8 U.S.C. § 1 l 53(b )(2).
The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the Petitioner did not qualify for classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree or as an individual of exceptional ability, and that he had not had not established that a waiver of the required job offer, and thus ofthe labor certification, would be in the national interest. The matter is now before us on appeal.
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.
An advanced degree is any United States academic or professional degree or a foreign equivalent degree above that of a bachelor's degree. A United States bachelor's degree or foreign equivalent degree followed by five years ofprogressive experience in the specialty is the equivalent of a master's degree. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2). In addition, "profession" is defined as of the occupations listed in section 10l(a)(32) ofthe Act, as well as any occupation for which a United States baccalaureate degree or its foreign equivalent is the minimum requirement for entry into the occupation. 1 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3).
Furthermore, "exceptional ability" means a degree of expertise significantly above that ordinarily encountered in the sciences, arts, or business. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2). A petitioner must initially submit documentation that satisfies at least three of six categories of evidence. 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(ii)(A)-(F). Meeting at least three criteria, however, does not, in and of itself, establish 1 Profession shall include but not be limited to architects, engineers, lawyers, physicians, surgeons, and teachers in elementary or secondary schools, colleges, academics, or seminaries. Section 10l(a)(32) of the Act. p. 2 eligibility for this classification.2 If a pet1t10ner does so, we will then conduct a final merits determination to decide whether the evidence in its totality shows that they are recognized as having a degree of expertise significantly above that ordinarily encountered in the field.
Ifa petitioner demonstrates eligibility for the underlying EB-2 classification, they must then establish that they merit a discretionary waiver of the job offer requirement "in the national interest." Section 203(b )(2)(B)(i) of the Act. While neither the statute nor the pertinent regulations define the term "national interest," Matter of Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. 884, 889 (AAO 2016), provides the framework for adjudicating national interest waiver petitions. Dhanasar states that U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) may, as matter of discretion3 , 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.
On appeal, the Petitioner submits a brief addressing only his eligibility as an individual of exceptional ability. Specifically, the Petitioner contends that he meets at least three of the categories of evidence at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(ii)(A)-(F). However, the Petitioner does not dispute or contest the Director's determinations that he did not qualify for classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree, and that he had not established a waiver of the required job offer, and thus of the labor certification, would be in the national interest. Specifically, the Director concluded that the Petitioner did not present evidence he possesses an advanced degree and that his documentation did not satisfy any of the three prongs set forth in the Dhanasar precedent decision.
Accordingly, we will not address these two uncontested grounds on appeal, and we deem them to be waived. If the affected party does not address issues raised by the director, and those issues are dispositive of the case, the appeal will be dismissed based on those waived issues. See, e.g., Matter of M-A-S-, 24 I&N Dec. 762, 767 n.2 (BIA 2009). Moreover, since the Petitioner's inability to demonstrate eligibility for a national interest waiver by satisfying the three prongs set forth in Dhanasar is dispositive of his appeal4
, we decline to reach and hereby reserve the Petitioner's appellate arguments regarding his eligibility as an individual of exceptional ability. 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 alternative issues on appeal where an applicant is otherwise ineligible).
As the Petitioner has not overcome the Director's determination that he did not meet the requisite three prongs ofthe Dhanasar analytical framework, we conclude that he has not established he is 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.