The Petitioner, an entrepreneur, seeks employment-based second preference (EB-2) immigrant classification as 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. § 1153(b )(2).
The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the petition, concluding the Petitioner 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 pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 103.3.
The Petitioner bears the burden ofproof 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 Christo 's, Inc., 26 I&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. An advanced degree is any U.S. academic or professional degree or a foreign equivalent degree above that of a bachelor's degree. 1 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(2). A U.S. bachelor's degree or a foreign equivalent degree followed by five years ofprogressive experience in the specialty is the equivalent of a master's degree. Id.
Once a petitioner demonstrates eligibility for the underlying classification, the petitioner must then establish eligibility for 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 ofDhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. 884 (AAO 2016), provides the framework for adjudicating national interest waiver petitions. Dhanasar states that U.S. Citizenship and 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 101 ( a)(32) of the Act. p. 2 Immigration Services (USCIS) may, as a matter of discretion,2 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. at 889.
Analysis
A. EB-2 Classification
The Petitioner asserts his eligibility for EB-2 classification based on his degree, which was determined to be the equivalent to a bachelor's degree in legal studies, plus 18 years of professional experience. The Director agreed, and in their RFE concluded the Petitioner qualifies as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree, and thus qualifies for EB-2 classification. We agree. B. Substantial Merit and National Importance
As an initial matter, we note that the Petitioner asserts the Director "imposed novel substantive and evidentiary requirements beyond those set forth in the regulations." However, he does not point to specific examples of this within the Director's request for evidence (RFE) or denial. The Petitioner also does not offer a detailed analysis explaining how the Director "imposed novel substantive and evidentiary requirements" in denying the petition or support his assertion with any pertinent law or regulations.
The Petitioner also generally alleges that the Director "did not apply the proper standard of proof in this case, instead imposing a stricter standard, and erroneously applied the law, to [his] detriment ...." The standard ofproof governing immigration benefit requests is "preponderance of evidence." Matter ofChawathe, 25 I&N Dec. at 3 75-76. To determine whether a petitioner has met its burden under the preponderance standard, we evaluate whether a petitioner's claims are "more likely than not" or "probably" true, but also consider the quality (including relevance, probative value, and credibility) of the evidence. Id. at 376; Matter ofE-M-, 20 I&N Dec. 77, 79-80 (Comm'r 1989). Here, the Petitioner does not further explain or identify any specific instance in which the Director applied a standard of proof other than the preponderance of evidence in denying the petition. Matter ofChawathe, 25 I&N Dec. at 375-76.
The Director's RFE explained the deficiencies and concerns in the Petitioner's initial filing relating to Dhanasar's three prongs and provided a non-exhaustive list of documentation and material that the Petitioner could submit to address such deficiencies. Therefore, the Director followed the applicable 2 See 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 is discretionary in nature). p. 3 regulations and procedure in adjudicating this petition, and there is no basis for finding the Director held the Petitioner to a higher standard of proof. See 8 C.F .R. § 103 .2(b )(8).
The first Dhanasar prong, substantial merit and national importance, focuses on the specific endeavor that the individual proposes to undertake and its "potential prospective impact." Id. at 889. 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. Id. 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 engineer. See generally 6 USCIS Policy Manual F.5(D)(l), https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual. As such, we will first identify the Petitioner's endeavor as shown in the record. Then, we will evaluate the Petitioner's evidence in support of the endeavor's substantial merit and national importance.
The Petitioner asserts that he will serve as the general and operations manager of his own business, _________________(the Company), located in thel IFlorida area. The Company uses LED screens and large screens for events, shows and indoor digital signage within the advertising and hospitality industries. The purpose of the Company is to "provide digital advertising screens for various indoor locations such as companies, schools, hospitals, airports, and other similar places. It also provides digital screens for outdoor activities such as public events." The Petitioner asserts the Company offers customized solutions tailored to customer's specific projects and needs.
The Petitioner's RFE response asserts that his endeavor is of national importance because the Company will "generate substantial ripple effects upon key commercial and business activities on behalf of the United States." He maintains that the Company is a "vital aspect of U.S. companies' development and operations - which contributes to a revenue-enhanced business ecosystem, and an enriched, productivity-centered economy." His RFE response highlights his professional roles and contends that "[his] professional record mirrors how his proposed work offers innovations and improvements of broad implications to the United States." For example, in one of his prior professional roles, he highlights that he led development projects, studied spaces for assemblies, recordings, and investments in audio visual equipment, as well as leading training for development of service team, assembly, and operation of equipment. He highlights that in this role, he also "did the fixed installations in the - Physical Preparation Room for Athletes - April/2018, in addition to several DVDs events, shows, and sporting events." He also provided photographs showing the installation of LED panels for a project at a church. The four photographs show him analyzing and designing the installation, assisting an employee in the installation, instructing an employee about the installation, and the completed installation.
By its fifth year of operation, he asserts the Company will create approximately 29 jobs and have $452,950 in total investments. The Petitioner's business plan explains that the Company will create the following positions: chief executive officer, chief operations officer, chief marketing officer, hardware technician, software technician, creation designer technician, logistic technician, sales and p. 4 marketing professional, and administrative clerk. Furthermore, the Petitioner provided evidence that he has incorporated his business, in the state of Florida. He also provides a fictitious name registration showing that the Company is known as I I I Iand is doing business and has filed taxes in Florida for the years 2022 and 2023, showing gross sales of$5,960 and $24,025, respectively. He asserts that through the Company he will "promote business activities by enhancing the sales and revenue capabilities of U.S. companies, prompting growth within businesses, streamlining the U.S. business ecosystem, generating jobs, and improving other economic initiatives." As the endeavor's merit may be demonstrated in a range of areas such as business, entrepreneurialism, science, technology, culture, health, or education, we agree with the Director that the endeavor has substantial merit. Id. However, as discussed below, the Petitioner has not established that his proposed endeavor is of national importance.
On appeal, the Petitioner submits a brief asserting that his endeavor is of national importance because he has more than 18 years ofexperience and specialized knowledge in various areas ofbusiness, which he will use to "enhance U.S. competitiveness."3 However, the evidence provided does not establish that the nature of his work is of national importance. For example, the photographs he provides show him through the various stages of an installation process for LED screens. These photographs show how his services would benefit his clients and customers, but do not establish that the Company's services have a potential prospective impact beyond those customers and clients at a level commiserate with national importance.Benefits limited to an employer or its clients We further note that his assertions with respect to the shortage of project managers in the United States, like him, does not render his proposed endeavor nationally important under the Dhanasar framework because the U.S. Department of Labor directly addresses these shortages through the labor certification process.Relied on a labor shortage Finally, while the investor and recommendation letters he submitted show that he is a businessperson with a professional network that holds him in high regard, this evidence is relevant to our analysis under Dhanasar 's second prong, where we consider whether the Petitioner is well-positioned to advance the proposed endeavor, but do not relate to the national importance of the endeavor.
The Petitioner relies heavily on industry reports and articles concerning such topics as the importance of immigrant entrepreneurship to economic growth and American competitiveness, the importance of operations management in business, the shortage of project managers, and a report about management consulting in the United States. However, while the articles provide a context for some of his assertions related to the role that business executives play in our economy, and the importance of economic progress, they do not specifically discuss the Petitioner's proposed endeavor or explain how his endeavor would have broader implications.Proposed endeavor too vague Matter ofChawathe, 25 I&N Dec. at 3 75-76. Further, merely working in an important field or profession is insufficient to establish the national importance of the proposed endeavor, as we explained in Dhanasar. Id. at 889. In 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.
As contemplated by Dhanasar, we examined the record to determine if there is sufficient evidence to conclude the Petitioner's "undertaking may have national importance ... 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 893 . Here, the Petitioner has not submitted evidence supporting the assertion that his method of designing and installing LED panels differs from or will improve upon those already available and in use in the United States.
We also explained in Dhanasar 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 ... may well be understood to have national importance." Id. at 890. We acknowledge that the Petitioner's business plan projects the creation of several jobs by its fifth year of operation, and that he has generated sales and income since his business began operations in 2022. However, his business plan does not sufficiently detail the basis for the revenue and staffing projections, nor does it adequately explain how the revenue and staffing projections will be realized. Matter ofChawathe, 25 l&N Dec. at 376. As such, without more, he has not established that his endeavor will have substantial positive economic effects at a level commensurate with national importance.Job creation or economic claims unsupported
Here, we agree with the Director's conclusion that the Petitioner has not established that his proposed endeavor stands to sufficiently extend beyond his customers to impact his field more broadly at a level commensurate with national importance. Nor has he shown that the work he proposes to undertake offers original innovations that contribute to advancements or otherwise has broader implications for his field. Furthermore, the Petitioner has not demonstrated that his specific endeavor has significant potential to employ U.S. workers or otherwise offers substantial positive economic effects for our nation. Without evidence regarding any projected U.S. economic impact or job creation directly attributable to his work, the Petitioner has not established that benefits to the regional or national economy resulting from his endeavor would reach the level of"substantial positive economic effects" contemplated by Dhanasar. Id. at 890.
C. Dhanasar's Second and Third Prongs
As the Petitioner has not established the national importance of his proposed endeavor, we decline to reach and hereby reserve the Petitioner's arguments regarding his eligibility under the second and third prongs. See INS v. Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. 24, 25 (1976) (noting that "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).
Conclusion
The Petitioner has not established the national importance ofhis proposed endeavor, and consequently that a waiver of the job offer and labor certification process, in the exercise of our discretion, is in the national interest.
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.