The Petitioner, a real estate developer, seeks classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree and as an individual of exceptional ability in the sciences, arts or business. 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 the record did not establish that the Petitioner qualifies for the national interest waiver. 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 I&N Dec. 537, 537 n.2 (AAO 2015). Upon de novo review, we will dismiss the appeal.
Law
To qualify for a national interest waiver, a petitioner must first show eligibility 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.
Once a petitioner demonstrates EB-2 eligibility, 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 USCIS may, as matter of discretion, 1 grant a national interest waiver ifthe 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.
Analysis
The Petitioner claims eligibility for both types of EB-2 classification, as a member ofthe professions with an advanced degree and as an individual of exceptional ability. The Director's decision focuses entirely on the issue of the national interest waiver, and includes no dete1mination as to whether the Petitioner qualifies for EB-2 classification. It is not readily apparent that the Petitioner has met the requirements for either classification,2 but we will not make a full initial determination on the Petitioner's EB-2 eligibility because the national interest waiver issue, by itself, is sufficient to determine the outcome of the appeal.
The Petitioner is an entrepreneur who has worked for various companies in Brazil. He claims to have co-founded a motorcycle dealership in 2006, when he was 17 years old. Since 2010, the Petitioner has held management or board positions with companies engaged in real estate and electronics. He earned a bachelor oflaw degree in 2012. The Petitioner entered the United States in March 2021 as a B-2 nonimmigrant visitor, and he filed the present petition in August 2021. The Petitioner's proposed endeavor is to serve as the general manager of a real estate development company in Florida, which he established in 2021. A business plan in the record indicates that the new company "will construct houses, primarily in thel lareas," and "will also invest in rental properties." Following a request for evidence (RFE), the Petitioner submitted a revised version of that plan.
The first prong of the Dhanasar national interest test, substantial merit and national impmiance, focuses on the specific endeavor that the individual 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. Matter ofDhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. Below, we will focus on the issue ofnational impmiance.
The business plan indicates that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor will have "National-level Impact" "by generating direct and indirect jobs, purchasing product/services provided by suppliers, paying taxes, and transferring [the Petitioner's] knowledge to individuals in the U.S.," while also contributing to housing in Florida.
An 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. Matter o/Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 890. The Petitioner's business plan projects "a total of six employees" after five years. The Petitioner did not establish that this amount ofemployment, and the resulting tax revenue, is substantial enough to have national importance. The 2 Those requirements can be found at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3). p. 3 initial business plan indicated that "national job multipliers published by the Economy Policy Institute" (EPI) predict that the Petitioner's creation of six direct jobs would produce about 53 indirect jobs. The revised business plan also cited Regional Input-Output Modeling System (RIMS II) multipliers for a real estate business in Florida project "84 jobs in Year 5." The Petitioner did not address or explain the significant discrepancy between the EPI and RIMS II figures, or show that these figures represent substantial job creation.Job creation or economic claims unsupported The Petitioner himself would not be creating these jobs. In response to the RFE, the Petitioner stated that his work will benefit the United States in four ways: by building low-cost housing to reduce homelessness; by catering to first-time homebuyers; by serving as a consultant; and by purchasing and reselling abandoned properties. The Petitioner provided statistics about some of these issues but did not show that his proposed endeavor would have a significant impact on any of them.
The Petitioner stated that his "specific services ... deeply differ from the ones generally provided by ordinary Entrepreneurs." The Petitioner did not explain how his work, and the benefits arising from that work, distinguish him from other real estate developers, or how claimed differences between himself and others give his work national importance.
The Petitioner submitted an "analysis and advisory evaluation" from a university faculty member, who provided general information about the real estate industry (sometimes in language very similar to the Petitioner's business plan), described the Petitioner's background, and concluded that the Petitioner is eligible for the national interest waiver. USCIS may, in its discretion, use as advisory opinions statements submitted as expert testimony, but USCIS is ultimately responsible for making the final determination regarding an individual's eligibility for the benefit sought. See Matter of Caron International, 19 I&N Dec. 791, 795 (Comm'r 1988).
The Petitioner stated that his "work has palpable broader implications, as its results are widely disseminated to other professionals in the business and construction markets." The Petitioner does not elaborate as to how his work is disseminated. His revised business plan indicates he plans to outperform, rather than influence, rival companies, because his company's "product quality, superior customer service, and competitive prices, combined with [ the Petitioner's] expertise and managerial skills, will elevate the Company above other industry operators."3 The Petitioner cited statistics about a shortage of construction workers, but the Petitioner did not explain how his proposed endeavor would increase the number of such workers.Relied on a labor shortage The Petitioner's business plan does not project that his company will directly employ any construction workers, and he did not explain how his proposed endeavor would cause more people to enter that occupation. The Director denied the petition, acknowledging the overall importance of real estate development and housing, but concluding that "the petitioner has not shown his proposed endeavor ... stands to sufficiently extend beyond an organization and its clients to impact the industry or field more broadly." 3 This stated intent to "elevate the [Petitioner's] Company above other industry operators" appears to contradict the Petitioner's earlier statement that he "is not competing with other U.S. Entrepreneurs."
On appeal, the Petitioner restates the proposed endeavor and maintains that it meets all the Dhanasar prongs. The substantive arguments in the appellate briefrepeat the Petitioner's response to the RFE. 4 The Petitioner's involvement in an industry with collective national importance does not demonstrate that his proposed endeavor, specifically, has or will have national importance. The Petitioner does not sufficiently distinguish his intended business from those of others in the field. The Petitioner has not established that the projected economic benefits from his proposed endeavor reach the required level ofnational impo1iance.
In light ofthe above conclusions, the Petitioner has not met his burden ofproofto show that he satisfies the first prong of the Dhanasar national interest test. Detailed discussion of the remaining prongs cannot change the outcome of this appeal. Therefore, we reserve argument on the other prongs. 5
Conclusion
The Petitioner has not established the national importance of the proposed endeavor. Therefore, the Petitioner has not shown eligibility for the national interest waiver, and we will dismiss the appeal as a matter of discretion.
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.