The Petitioner, a general and operations manager, seeks classification 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 of the 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. § 1 l 53(b )(2)(B)(i). U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) may grant this discretionary waiver ofthe 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, he 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 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.
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. Next, a petitioner must then demonstrate they merit a discretionary waiver of the job offer requirement "in the national interest." Section 203(b)(2)(B)(i) of the Act. Matter ofDhanasar, 26 l&N Dec. 884, 889 (AAO 2016) provides that USCIS may, as matter of discretion, 1 grant a national interest waiver if the petitioner shows:
- 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 Director's decision did not render a determination as to whether the Petitioner qualifies as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree or as an individual of exceptional ability. Instead, the decision only addressed the Petitioner's eligibility for a national interest waiver. Therefore, the issue for consideration on appeal 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 his proposed endeavor under the first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework. 2 In denying the petition, the Director concluded that while the Petitioner was well-positioned to advance his proposed endeavor under Dhanasar 's second prong, the Petitioner did not demonstrate that he meets the first and third prongs of the Dhanasar framework. On appeal, the Petitioner maintains that the evidence was sufficient to demonstrate that he meets all three prongs under the Dhanasar framework and otherwise warrants a national interest waiver as a matter of discretion. The first prong, substantial merit and national importance, focuses on the specific endeavor that the noncitizen proposes to undertake. See Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. 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.
The Petitioner is a trained electrician and a general and operations manager. In a letter of support, he described his proposed endeavor as follows:
My proposed endeavor is to own and operate a business for installation, repairs, and maintenance of heating, ventilation, and air conditioning systems (HV AC) and Smart Home systems, based in Orlando [Florida]. The company, legally organized as an LLC, will initially serve the following market segments: meals (restaurants, supermarkets, and bars, bakery, and others); hospitality (hotels); and real property management (industrial, office and administrative buildings, educational and civilian institutions, organizations, and facilities). As the business solidifies, I hope that I will be able to expand across the State of Florida and manage to serve other market segments in other economically depressed areas needing higher support for the development of the local economy.
The company will make sure that all projects are carried out on the agreed schedule and exceeding the clients' expectations. The substantial merit of my proposed 2 Because the Petitioner has not demonstrated his eligibility for a national interest waiver on appeal, we need not remand the decision for the Director to determine whether he qualifies for the underlying EB-2 visa classification. p. 3 endeavor can also be evidenced by the sharp market need for General and Operations Managers to meet the present and future demands of the USA.
The Petitioner also submitted his business plan, copies of his academic credentials and resume, an expert opinion letter, and letters of support and recommendation in support of the petition. The Director issued a request for evidence (RFE), noting that the evidence submitted with the initial filing was insufficient to demonstrate that the proposed endeavor has substantial merit and national importance. Specifically, the Director observed that the Petitioner did not provide specific insight as to what he intends to do in the United States, and requested a detailed description of the proposed endeavor so that the Petitioner's request for a national interest waiver could be evaluated under the Dhanasar framework.
In response to the RFE, the Petitioner submitted a cover letter that reiterates his intention to form an HV AC company. The Petitioner emphasizes that his endeavor has substantial merit and national importance "insofar as the services offered by my company are essential for the promotion of air quality and health for all; in addition to playing an important role as a small business in the national economy." The Petitioner further claimed that his proposed endeavor will have positive economic impacts, generate direct and indirect jobs, and have social and environmental impacts.
The Petitioner also resubmitted his business plan, expert opinion letter, and testimonial letters in support of his eligibility for a waiver of the job offer.
In denying the petition, the Director determined that the Petitioner provided insufficient evidence to establish the proposed endeavor's national importance. The Director determined that the Petitioner had not shown that his proposed endeavor had significant potential to employ U.S. workers, would offer substantial positive economic effects for the United States, or that the benefits to the national economy resulting from the proposed endeavor would reach a level contemplated by the Dhanasar framework.Job creation or economic claims unsupported On appeal, the Petitioner provides a brief emphasizing his qualifications and asserting that the evidence ofrecord establishes the national importance of the proposed endeavor.
A. Substantial Merit
First, we will address the issue of substantial merit, which may be demonstrated in a range of areas such as business, entrepreneurialism, science, technology, culture, health, or education. See Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. The Director did not make a determination in the denial decision regarding the substantial merit of the Petitioner's proposed endeavor.
The record contains supporting statements from the Petitioner in which he consistently maintained that his proposed endeavor is to open an HV AC company that will provide installation, repairs, and maintenance of heating, ventilation, air conditioning systems, and Smart Home systems for a variety of market segments. The Petitioner also provided a business plan in which he discussed his professional qualifications that will enable him to provide such services. We conclude that the record supports the Petitioner's claim that his proposed work as general and operations manager ofhis HVAC company has substantial merit.
B. National Importance
Notwithstanding our favorable determination on the issue of substantial merit, for the reasons discussed below, we conclude that the Petitioner has not sufficiently demonstrated the national importance of his proposed endeavor under the first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework. In determining 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." See id. 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.
We agree with the Director that the Petitioner has not provided sufficient documentation explaining how the proposed endeavor is of national importance. While the Petitioner's statements and evidence reflect his intention to provide HV AC installation, repair, and maintenance to a variety of industries, he has not offered sufficient information and evidence to demonstrate that the prospective impact of his proposed endeavor rises to the level of national importance. In Dhanasar, we determined that the petitioner's teaching activities did not rise to the level of having national importance because they would not impact his field more broadly. See id. at 893. Here, we conclude the Petitioner has not shown that his proposed endeavor stands to sufficiently extend beyond his clients to impact the HV AC industry or the U.S. economy more broadly at a level commensurate with national importance.No broader implications shown As noted above, the record contains a business plan which contains statistics and information pertaining to HV AC and Smart Home market perspectives in the United States. In determining national importance, however, the relevant question is not the importance of the industry, field, or profession in which an individual will work; instead, we focus on the "specific endeavor that the [noncitizen] proposes to undertake." Id. at 889. The Petitioner must demonstrate the national importance of his specific, proposed endeavor of owning and operating an HVAC and Smart Home company rather than the importance of the HVAC and Smart Home industry.
Throughout the record, the Petitioner points to his education, skills, knowledge, and record of success in his field. The Petitioner also provided several letters of support that discuss his experience in the field of pharmacy. The Petitioner's knowledge, skills, and experience in his field, however, relate to the second prong of the Dhanasar framework, which "shifts the focus from the proposed endeavor to the foreign national." See id at 890. The issue here is whether the specific endeavor that he proposes to undertake has national importance under the second consideration of Dhanasar's first prong. To evaluate whether the Petitioner's proposed endeavor satisfies the national importance requirement, we look to evidence documenting the "potential prospective impact" of his work.
The Petitioner submitted letters of support that speak to his character and his talents in the field. 3 For example, a letter from states that he worked with the Petitioner on various 3 While we do not discuss each piece of evidence individually, we have reviewed and considered each one. p. 5 projects and commends his "comprehensive knowledge ofraw materials, production processes, quality control, costs and of other techniques to maximize efficiency in manufacturing and distribution of goods within the context ofwhere he is carrying out his activities.".__ ____________ speaks constructively of the Petitioner's work and recommends him for the requested classification, noting that he "has many qualities as a professional" such as "keeping up-to-date on new tech and applying new knowledge at work." A letter from __________ a civil engineer and former coworker, speaks highly of the Petitioner's professional competence and extensive knowledge of computers and computer systems.
Although the writers praise the Petitioner's past achievements and abilities, none ofthe authors discuss the Petitioner's specific proposed endeavor ofowning and operating an HVAC company in the United States. Instead, the authors primarily focus on the Petitioner's character, skills, and past professional accomplishments. Neither the letters nor any other evidence within the record provide insight into how the Petitioner's endeavor to provide HV AC and Smart Horne installation, repair, and maintenance services will positively impact the region or the industry beyond his clients. Again, in determining national importance, the relevant question is not the importance of the 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.
The Petitioner also provided an expert opinion letter from an adjunct assistant professor of business at I Iwho opines that the Petitioner meets the requirements of the Dhanasar framework.
The professor discusses aspects of the Petitioner's occupation and provides this generalized information about his endeavor:Proposed endeavor too vague
[The Petitioner] specializes in the technical administration ofthe use oftools, products, and operational processes essential to the functioning of a company. His work is in demand and has national importance in this field. Through his exceptional track record of experience as an entrepreneur and general and operations manager, he has demonstrated that he is fully capable and well-positioned to advance the proposed endeavor related to the heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning systems (HV AC) and Smart Horne industry.
He further stated:
It is important to highlight that this field requires very specific knowledge for him to achieve the success he has had because it consists of an area that requires technical expertise in business management and HV AC and smart home services. This makes [the petitioner] an Entrepreneur who possesses a high-level technical knowledge in the administration and training of personnel.
The analysis in the professor's letter is not specific to the Petitioner's actual endeavor. Instead, he states that the Petitioner qualifies for Dhanasar's first prong because "[t]he U.S. would benefit from the unique expertise and skills of a General and Operations Manager with expertise in the HV AC and smart home installation and retail services...." Moreover, the professor's discussion primarily focuses on the HVAC and Smart Hornes market rather than the Petitioner's specific proposed endeavor. As a matter of discretion, we may use expert opinion letters submitted by a petitioner as p. 6 advisory testimony. However, USCTS is responsible for making the final determination regarding eligibility for the benefit sought. Where an opinion letter is not in accord with other information or is in any way questionable, we are not required to accept or may give less weight to that evidence. Matter of Caron Int'l, Inc., 19 T&N Dec. 791, 795 (Comm'r 1988). Here, the analysis offered in the professor's letter is largely limited to general observations about the Petitioner's qualifications and the occupation and industry in which he will work and does not offer an analytical roadmap that lays out the basis for the opinion that the Petitioner meets Dhanasar 's first prong.Support letters generic or unsupported We conclude the opinion letter provided lends little probative value to the matter here. See Matter of Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. at 376.
The Petitioner's business plan explains the services the business will provide, the market for HVAC and Smart Home technologies, and the company's proposed marketing, staffing, and financial forecasts. It further indicates it will help economically depressed communities, including regions in central Florida.
However, the Petitioner has not provided corroborating evidence to support his claims that his company's activities stand to provide substantial economic and environmental benefits to Florida or the United States. The Petitioner's claims that his HV AC and Smart Home business will benefit the Florida and U.S. economy have not been established through independent and objective evidence. The Petitioner's statements are not sufficient to demonstrate his endeavor has the potential to provide economic or environmental benefits to Florida or the United States. The Petitioner must support his assertions with relevant, probative, and credible evidence. See id. Also, without sufficient documentary evidence that his proposed job duties as the company's general and operations manager would impact the HV AC and Smart Home industry more broadly, rather than benefiting his business and his proposed clients, the Petitioner has not demonstrated by a preponderance of the evidence that his proposed endeavor is of national importance.
The business plan projects that it will initially hire 8 employees, including a maintenance and repair worker, five helpers, a first-line supervisor of office and administrative support workers, and a receptionist/information clerk, and will pay a total of approximately $350,000 in wages annually. The plan further indicated that it would hire five HV AC mechanics and installers who will be compensated by commission. Further, the plan claims that the company will create indirect jobs, target economically depressed communities, and generate over $5 .2 million in revenue by the end of its fifth year of operations. However, the record does not sufficiently detail the basis for its financial and staffing projections, or adequately explain how these projections will be realized. Although the Petitioner submits evidence on appeal that he is the vice-president of a recently incorporated LLC in Florida, the Petitioner has not provided corroborating evidence demonstrating that his company's future staffing levels and business activities stand to provide substantial economic benefits to Florida and the United States. While the Petitioner expresses his desire to contribute to the United States and its underutilized business areas, he has not established with specific, probative evidence that his endeavor will have broader implications in his field, will have significant potential to employ U.S. workers, or will have other substantial positive economic effects in an economically underutilized business area of Florida or in the United States. The Petitioner must support his assertions with relevant, probative, and credible evidence. See id. Even ifwe were to assume everything the Petitioner claims will happen, the record lacks evidence showing that creating 13 jobs, paying annual wages of p. 7 approximately $350,000, and generating revenue of over $5.2 million over a five-year period rises to the level of national importance.
The Petitioner also discusses on appeal guidance from the USCIS Policy Manual related to special evidentiary considerations for national interest waiver petitions involving entrepreneurs and individuals with advanced degrees in science, technology, engineering, or mathematics (STEM) fields. We conclude that neither the Petitioner's appellate arguments nor the evidence in the record establish the national importance of the proposed endeavor. The guidance related to entrepreneurs seeking national interest waivers acknowledges that there may be unique aspects to the evidence submitted by entrepreneurial petitioners and discusses some of these types of evidence. See generally 6 USCIS Policy Manual F.5(D)(4), https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual. While the Petitioner describes his proposed endeavor as an entrepreneurial effort, he does not explain how this guidance helps establish that his proposed endeavor has national importance. Moreover, the record lacks many of the specific types of evidence that the guidance states may be relevant in entrepreneurial petitions, such as outside investments, incubator or accelerator participation, published materials about the Petitioner, intellectual property, and awards or grants.No interest from users, customers or investors See id.
We recognize the value ofHVAC and Smart Home services; however, merely working in an important field is insufficient to establish the national importance of the proposed endeavor. We conclude the Petitioner has not shown that his proposed endeavor stands to sufficiently extend beyond his clientele to impact the HVAC and Smart Home industry or the U.S. economy more broadly at a level commensurate with national importance, as his evidence and statements are not sufficient to demonstrate his endeavor has the potential to provide his claimed economic and environmental benefits to the United States. The Petitioner must support his assertions with relevant, probative, and credible evidence. See Matter ofChawathe, 25 I&N Dec. at 376.
Because the documentation in the record does not establish the national importance of his proposed endeavor as required by the first prong of the Dhanasar precedent decision, the Petitioner has not demonstrated eligibility for a national interest waiver. Since this issue is dispositive of the Petitioner's appeal, we decline to reach and hereby reserve the appellate arguments regarding his eligibility under the remaining Dhanasar prongs. See INS v. Bagamas bad, 4 2 9 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 requisite first prong ofthe Dhanasar analytical framework, we conclude that he has not established that he is eligible for or otherwise merits a national interest waiver as a matter of discretion.
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.