The Petitioner seeks second preference immigrant classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree, as well as a national interest waiver of the job offer requirement attached to this EB-2 immigrant classification. See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 203(b )(2), 8 U.S.C. § l l 53(b )(2).
The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the Petitioner qualified for the EB-2 classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree, but that she 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 l&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. Once a petitioner demonstrates eligibility as either a member of the professions holding an advanced degree or an individual of exceptional ability, 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 (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 discretion,
1 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 the proposed endeavor; and
- On balance, waiving the requirements of a job offer and a labor certification would benefit the United States.
Id. at 889.
Analysis
The Petitioner filed this petition in October 2023. At the time of filing, the Petitioner was a doctoral research student in the field of nutrition science at ______ in Washington DC. According to her school transcript, as of March 2023, the Petitioner has completed, three semesters of her PhD coursework and was in the process of completing her fourth semester. In addition to her coursework, the Petitioner provided evidence to establish she is a graduate assistant at and that she is engaged in research and teaching in nutrition science. After analyzing the initial evidence, the Director issued a request for evidence (RFE), noting deficiencies in the record, to which the Petitioner timely responded.
The Director determined the Petitioner qualifies for EB-2 classification as a member ofthe professions holding an advanced degree based on her U.S. master's degree in project management froml I I in Maryland, which she earned in May 2020. We agree. The issue on appeal is whether the Petitioner established that a waiver of the requirement of a job offer, and thus a labor certification, would be in the national interest.
A. Prong One of the Dhanasar Framework
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." Matter ofDhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. An endeavor's merit may be demonstrated in a range of areas such as business, entrepreneurialism, science, technology, culture, health, or education. 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. See generally 6 USCIS Policy Manual F.5(D)(l), https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual. 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. Id. 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.
B. The Proposed Endeavor
The Petitioner's proposed endeavor is described in her initial personal statement where she explains that she studies the effects of seaweed consumption on the microbiota of obese mice. She intends to continue researching this topic with the goal of determining if inclusion of seaweed vegetables in a western-type diet promotes healthy microbial profiles in the gut and reduces the development of inflammation, obesity, and metabolic dysfunction. She explains that "to [her] knowledge, no study p. 3 has clearly demonstrated how a seaweed vegetables-based diet changes the microbiome population, leading to a change in body weight." She also highlights that her research has been published in the following publications: Dietary Supplements and Nutraceuticals; and Functional Food Science. In her RFE response, the Petitioner provides an additional personal statement in which she explains that she will use her research on seaweed consumption to offer solutions to global obesity, and that she will employ her research and skills in machine learning and artificial intelligence to understand the complex interaction between seaweed's components, microbiota, and human metabolism to yield results that benefit society. Among the intended results, the Petitioner explains that her research will "pioneer nutrition-based solutions that harness the power of marine bioresources for global health improvement, leveraging the gut microbiota's role" to make healthier "microbial profiles," reduce obesity, improve metabolic function, and contribute to the field of nutrition sciences and potential dietary interventions for obesity management. And on appeal, the Petitioner provides a statement in which she contends that the Director erred and seeks a review of her application "in detail and without bias." Upon de novo review, for the reasons stated below, the record does not include sufficient information or supporting evidence to establish the national importance of her proposed endeavor and its prospective impact.
C. Analysis of Prong One of the Dhanasar Framework
The Director determined that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor is of substantial merit. As stated above, an endeavor's merit may be demonstrated in a range of areas such as business, entrepreneurialism, science, technology, culture, health, or education. Therefore, we agree with the Director's determination. However, while the Petitioner has established her proposed endeavor has substantial merit, she has not established its national importance, for the following reasons. To evaluate whether the Petitioner's proposed endeavor satisfies the national importance requirement, we look to evidence documenting the "potential prospective impact" ofher work. Matter ofDhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. Furthermore, in Dhanasar we noted that "[a]n undertaking may have national importance for example, because it has national or even global implications within a particular field." Id. The Petitioner asserts that the potential prospective impact of her proposed endeavor extends to public health and nutrition policy including a reevaluation of the nutritional guidelines. She asserts her research may lead to ecofriendly alternatives to current obesity management strategies, as well as highlight the importance of dietary diversity, and the nutritional value of underutilized food sources that will "unlock" the full potential of functional foods. The Petitioner asserts her endeavor advances national and global initiatives to combat hunger, and that multiple societal and economic benefits would flow from her endeavor, including investments in seaweed farming, which could transform fragile coastal communities by creating a sustainable way to alleviate poverty.
In evaluating the national importance of Dr. Dhanasar's proposed endeavor, we gave significant weight to "probative expert letters from individuals holding senior positions in academia, government, and industry that describe the importance of hypersonic propulsion research as it relates to U.S. strategic interests" and "detailed expert letters describing U.S. Government interest" in his specific research. Matter of Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 892. USCIS may, in its discretion, use as advisory opinions statements from universities, professional organizations, or other sources submitted in evidence as expert testimony. See Matter of Caron Int'l, 19 I&N Dec. 791, 795 (Comm'r. 1988). However, USCIS is ultimately responsible for making the final determination regarding a foreign p. 4 national 's eligibility, thus, the submission of these support letters is not presumptive evidence of eligibility. Id., see alsoMatterofD-R-, 25 I&N Dec. 445,460 n.13 (BIA 2011) (discussing the varying weight that may be given expert testimony based on relevance, reliability, and the overall probative value).
Although the Petitioner has provided multiple letters of support for her research, the letters do not sufficiently explain how her research will impact the field of nutrition science or matters of national or global importance more broadly. See Matter of Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. at 375 (standing for the proposition that to determine whether a petitioner has met their burden under the preponderance standard, we consider the quality, relevance, probative value, and credibility of the evidence). First, many ofthe letters are from professors in the department where the Petitioner is pursuing her graduate studies, and while they describe her work in glowing terms, they do not provide enough detail to understand her endeavor's national importance. 2 Matter of Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. at 375-76. Second, some of the letters lack the objectivity necessary for us to understand the national or global impact of her work, or its broader implications.No broader implications shown For example, in one letter, the Petitioner's research is described as "groundbreaking," "trailbreaking," and with the "potential to revolutionize the way we approach nutrition and health," however these statements lack context. Id. Third, like the Petitioner, many of the writers emphasize the toll that obesity and a lack of proper nutrition have on society, but they do not provide a sufficient explanation to understand how the Petitioner's research will alleviate these problems. Id. Fourth, another writer, a professor of medicine at ______appears to
I
Other letters provide general support for her proposed endeavor but are insufficient to understand how her research will have a broader impact. For example, one writer, an assistant professor at the I of Medicine and Science, explains that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor is of national importance because it aligns with national initiatives and may have implications on reproduction in women of childbearing age, and public health. Another writer also generally explains that the Petitioner's research will have economic impacts because obesity has a societal cost but offers insufficient details to bolster this statement.Job creation or economic claims unsupported We acknowledge these assertions, which speak to the substantial merit ofthe Petitioner's endeavor, however, they are insufficient to establish the endeavor's national importance. Id. In analyzing a proposed endeavor's national importance, Dhanasar requires us to look beyond the field of endeavor, to examine the specific endeavor the Petitioner proposes to undertake. Matter ofDhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. Here, while we acknowledge the fields of nutrition, obesity management, and sustainable farming may be subjects of national or global initiatives, the Petitioner's proposed endeavor does not encompass a significant enough space in any of these fields to be considered of national importance. For example, in Dhanasar, we determined that the petitioner's teaching activities at a U.S. university did not rise to the level of having national importance because they would not impact his field more broadly. Id. at 893. This is because in general, the benefit ofteaching is only directly beneficial to the students being taught and not the wider population. Id. And, while one could argue that teaching one person has a broader impact because that individual now has knowledge they could impart to others, the connection between teaching one person and the broader impact that results from that knowledge is too amorphous to consider the endeavor itself to be of national importance. Matter ofChawathe, 25 I&N Dec. at 375-76.
Although the Petitioner asserts her endeavor could have potential impacts on the economy and societal welfare, she does not provide sufficient evidence to support these assertions. Matter ofChawathe, 25 I&N Dec. at 375-76. For example, to support her assertions that her endeavor has national and global implications on public health and nutrition policy, she provides evidence that the World Bank funds initiatives to combat hunger and that the National Institute of Food and Agriculture created a small business innovation research program to support research and development. She also provides news articles to understand the societal problem of obesity, the importance of nutrition, the role of seaweed to improve digestion because of the phytochemicals found in seaweed, and Biden Administration fact sheets discussing government initiatives to combat hunger and improve nutrition to create stronger communities. While we acknowledge the articles and reports provide a context for understanding the Petitioner's assertions, and helps establish the substantial merit of her endeavor, because none of the documents discuss the Petitioner's research or her proposed endeavor, the information does not establish its national importance through any asserted or cognizable positive economic effects or potential prospective impact on the economy and societal welfare. Id. Moreover, while a reference letter generally explains that the Petitioner's research will have economic impacts because obesity has a societal cost, this letter does not provide sufficient detail to understand how her endeavor will alleviate the societal costs of obesity. Id.
Finally, we acknowledge the Petitioner's evidence of her academic act1v1t1es including: the presentation of her research at conferences and symposia; submission and inclusion of her research posters in academic gatherings; the inclusion of her research as a book chapter; her receipt of a $500 travel grant; her research publications; and her membership in professional associations. However, this information is considered as part of our analysis ofDhanasar 's second prong, where we examine p. 6 whether a petitioner is well positioned to advance the endeavor. Matter ofDhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 890.
Because a petitioner must establish that they meet all three prongs of the Dhanasar framework to obtain a national interest waiver, if even one of the prongs is not established, a petitioner is ineligible for this waiver. Accordingly, because she has not established her eligibility under prong one, we decline to reach and hereby reserve the Petitioner's arguments regarding the second and third prongs of the Dhanasar framework. 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 ofwhich 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 first prong ofthe Dhanasar analytical framework, we find that she has not established eligibility for a national interest waiver as a matter of discretion. The appeal will be dismissed for the above stated reasons.
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.