PetitionLens
Log inGet started
All decisions
DismissedNational Interest Waiver · Appeal

Administrative manager and operations general manager

Business & finance · decided 2023-11-20 · TSC · NOV202023_09B5203

Official PDF on uscis.gov

How each part of the test was decided

Read from the appeals office's own sentences by fixed rules, not from the Director's findings or the petitioner's arguments. Each result shows the sentence it came from. The official PDF controls.

  • Step 0Eligible for EB-2Not decided
    The Director's denial rested on this
    The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the petition, concluding the Petitioner had not established eligibility for the underlying EB-2 visa classification and a waiver ofthe required job offer, and thus of the labor certification, would be in the national interest. p. 1
  • Prong 1Merit and national importanceNot decided

    No finding on this in the appeals office's own words.

  • Prong 2Well positioned to advance itNot decided

    No finding on this in the appeals office's own words.

  • Prong 3Worth waiving the job offerNot decided

    No finding on this in the appeals office's own words.

The decision in brief

Sentences picked out of the text automatically. Read them in context below; the official PDF controls.

Summary sentence

The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the petition, concluding the Petitioner had not established eligibility for the underlying EB-2 visa classification and a waiver ofthe required job offer, and thus of the labor certification, would be in the national interest. See in text

What the AAO decided

Main reasons given

  • See INS v. Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. 24, 25 (1976) (stating that agencies are not required to make "purely advisory findings" on issues that are unnecessary to the ultimate decision); see also Matter ofL-A-C-, 26 I&N Dec. 516, 526 n.7 (BIA 2015) (declining to reach alternative issues on appeal where applicants do not otherwise meet their burden of proof). See in text
Read the full decision (2 pages)

Objections found (0)

Automated tags. Each shows the sentence that triggered it.

No catalog objection was detected in the analysis section.

    Full decision

    OCR text from the official PDF, reformatted for reading. Scan errors carry over; the PDF controls.

    Highlighted: Outcome (2) AAO finding (1)Matter of X citation
    Decision header
    U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services · Non-Precedent Decision of the Administrative Appeals Office · Date: NOV. 20, 2023 · In Re: 28963261 · Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision · Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Workers (National Interest Waiver)

    The Petitioner, an administrative manager and operations general manager, seeks second preference 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 EB-2 classification. 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 eligibility for the underlying EB-2 visa classification and a waiver ofthe 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 l&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.

    To establish eligibility for a national interest waiver, a petitioner must also 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. On appeal, the Petitioner's brief solely argues her eligibility for a national interest waiver. The brief does not address or contest the Director's specific findings regarding the underlying EB-2 visa classification. 1 Accordingly, we deem this ground to be waived. An issue not raised on appeal is waived. See, e.g., Matter ofO-R-E, 28 I&N Dec. 330, 336 n.5 (BIA 2021) (citing Matter ofR-A-M-, 25 I&N Dec. 657, 658 n.2 (BIA 2012). Therefore, the Petitioner did not demonstrate her eligibility for second preference immigrant classification.

    Moreover, we need not reach, and therefore reserve the Petitioner's appellate arguments regarding her qualification for a national interest waiver. See INS v. Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. 24, 25 (1976) (stating that agencies are not required to make "purely advisory findings" on issues that are unnecessary to the ultimate decision); see also Matter ofL-A-C-, 26 I&N Dec. 516, 526 n.7 (BIA 2015) (declining to reach alternative issues on appeal where applicants do not otherwise meet their burden of proof). ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.