The Petitioner seeks employment-based second preference (EB-2) 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 classification. See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 203(b )(2), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b )(2).
SCOPS denied the petition, concluding the record did not establish that the Petitioner qualified for a 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 of the evidence. Matter ofChawathe, 25 l&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. If a petitioner demonstrates eligibility for the underlying EB-2 classification, he or she must then establish that he or she merits a discretionary waiver of the job offer requirement "in the national interest." Id. Matter ofDhanasar, 26 l&N Dec. 884, 889 (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 his or her proposed endeavor; and 1 See Flores v. Garland, 72 F.4th 85, 88 (5th Cir. 2023) (joining the Third, Ninth, Eleventh, and D.C. Circuit Courts of Appeals in concluding that USCIS' decision to grant or deny a national interest waiver to be discretionary in nature).
- On balance, waiving the job offer requirement would benefit the United States. 2
Analysis
SCOPS concluded that the Petitioner qualified as an individual holding an advanced degree. The remaining issue to be determined 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. The Petitioner's proposed endeavor was to operate a consultancy company that would focus on providing services to small- and medium-sized enterprises, or SMEs. The Petitioner initially described her proposed endeavor as follows:
[The Petitioner's] proposed endeavor to provide consulting, training, and services in business administration, financial literacy, banking, and investments holds immense significance in bolstering the success and stability of entrepreneurs and small business owners. This initiative aligns with a critical need, as many entrepreneurs lack the comprehensive financial knowledge required to make informed decisions and ensure the longevity of their ventures. By offering expert guidance and educational resources, [the Petitioner's] initiative empowers entrepreneurs to navigate the intricacies of business finances effectively, maintain accurate records, and safeguard their enterprises against financial challenges.
The 1rnttattve involves not only providing advisory services to entrepreneurs and individuals but also delivering training and educational programs. This requires a diverse workforce of professionals, educators, trainers, curriculum developers, and administrative staff. These roles, in tum, necessitate a range of skill sets, from financial experts to instructional designers. As a result, the endeavor directly contributes to job creation across various sectors, enhancing employment prospects for U.S. workers.
Furthermore, the employment impact extends beyond the initiative itself Creating new jobs generates a ripple effect by boosting demand for related industries . . . .
Additionally, the initiative's focus on financial literacy aligns with the objectives of financial institutions and advisory firms, leading to increased demand for their services and potential expansion of their workforce.
By promoting financial literacy, the initiative contributes to economic growth through increased consumer spending, responsible borrowing, and strategic investment. This comprehensive approach underscores the endeavor's role in fostering a more resilient 2 See Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 888-91, for elaboration on these three prongs. p. 3 and robust economy while improving the financial well-being of individuals and communities.
Although SCOPS determined that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor has substantial merit and that she is well-positioned to advance the endeavor, SCOPS concluded the record did not establish that the endeavor is ofnational importance or that, on balance, waiving the job offer requirement would benefit the United States.Did not show the waiver outweighs labor certification On appeal, the Petitioner asserts that SCOPS' decision "was based on an incorrect application of the legal standards and an improper evaluation of the evidence." While the Petitioner discusses the preponderance of the evidence standard, she does not articulate how SCOPS misapplied the standard in denying the petition. Upon review, for the reasons discussed below, we conclude that the Petitioner has not sufficiently demonstrated the national importance of her endeavor in order to establish her eligibility under the first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework.
The first prong, substantial merit and national importance, 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. We agree with SCOPS that the Petitioner established that her proposed endeavor has substantial merit.
In determining whether the proposed endeavor has national importance, we consider its potential prospective impact. Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. 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. In Dhanasar, we further noted that "we look for broader implications" ofthe 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.
To demonstrate the national importance of her proposed endeavor, the Petitioner provided an expert opinion letter, articles, and reports discussing issues related to businesses and the economy. This material, however, does not provide sufficient insight into the Petitioner's business plans or how her specific endeavor would have a potential prospective impact of national importance. The Petitioner also submitted letters expressing investment interest and letters of recommendation discussing her skills and experience. We note that evidence of investment interest and a petitioner's job experience generally relates not to the national importance ofan endeavor, as discussed in the first prong ofMatter ofDhanasar, but to the second, 3 which evaluates whether a petitioner is well-positioned to advance an endeavor.Proposed endeavor too vague As such, the letters do not sufficiently demonstrate the national importance of the Petitioner's proposed endeavor.
Regarding the Petitioner's proposed endeavor, the record includes a business plan that provides the following explanation of her company's intentions:
We will empower individuals, businesses, and financial institutions by providing expert financial literacy, strategic consulting, and investment advisory services. Our mission is to enhance financial stability, support business growth, and promote economic empowerment through innovative, client-focused solutions. By implementing best practices in financial planning, business strategy, and investment management, we will revolutionize how individuals and organizations navigate their financial futures, starting in key U.S. markets and expanding nationwide.
The Petitioner, however, has not provided an explanation of how she would undertake an endeavor of a scale that would reach the level of "substantial positive economic effects" contemplated by Dhanasar.Job creation or economic claims unsupported Id. at 890. While the business plan offers an overview ofthe services the Petitioner intends to provide, the asserted national importance of her proposed endeavor relies on the overall importance of the role that small- and medium-sized businesses play in growing and sustaining prosperous economies; the Petitioner has not explained how her individual consulting company would have a national-level impact to become, as stated in the business plan, "a trusted leader in financial consulting, making a lasting impact on businesses, individuals, and communities nationwide." The Petitioner has not explained what "transformative initiatives in financial literacy and advisory services" or "cuttingedge financial planning tools" she has developed for her company's clients. The business plan generally speculates that the company's services would result in entrepreneurial success and significant business growth in the United States, but it does not provide independent evidence or otherwise explain how the company would have a prospective national impact "to bring transformative change to the financial advisory industry."Plan or projections not corroborated
Concerning the purported economic impact of the Petitioner's business, while her statements and information in her business plan generally speculate that her company would create jobs in the United States, she did not provide independent evidence or otherwise explain how her business would create jobs at a level that would have a significant impact on a given region or have a prospective national impact on a specific field. For example, although her business plan anticipates cashtlow amounts for her business's fifth year of operation to be between $103,945 and $208,181, stating that the business expects to employ at least twenty employees by that year, the plan does not explain how these forecasts were calculated or adequately clarify how these projections will be realized. A petitioner must support assertions with relevant, probative, and credible evidence. See Matter of Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. at 376. She has not done so here.
On appeal, the Petitioner's brief emphasizes guidance in the USCIS Policy Manual concerning national importance considerations outside of quantifiable economic impacts, such as the prospective impacts of endeavors related to research, pure science, the furtherance of human knowledge, or those with the potential to broadly enhance societal welfare. 4 The Petitioner has not offered evidence or an explanation to demonstrate that her specific endeavor involves those considerations-beyond a general assertion that expanding financial literacy positively impacts societal welfare. The record does 4 See 6 USCJS Policy Manual at F.5(D)(3), https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual. p. 5 not include an explanation of how the Petitioner would operate a company that would impact society at the level of national importance contemplated under the first prong of the Dhanasar framework. In addition, while the basis of the Petitioner's business is imparting her knowledge and purported expertise for the benefit of her clients, 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 Dhanasar at 893. The Petitioner's intent to transmit her knowledge to clients is not considered an activity that would have a broad impact in the field of financial literacy.No broader implications shown We note that the users Policy Manual addresses specific evidentiary considerations for entrepreneurs.5 These considerations include the fact that, while users decides each case on its merits, broad assertions regarding general benefits to the economy and potential to create jobs will not establish an entrepreneur's qualification for a national interest waiver. For example, an entrepreneur cannot demonstrate national importance under the first prong solely by opening a consulting firm for those working or seeking to work in a nationally important occupation. Similarly, statements and evidence regarding the importance of the relevant industry overall will not demonstrate that a person seeking to start a business in that industry satisfies the national importance prong. Here, the importance of the Petitioner's business endeavor cannot be established based solely on its general relationship to business sectors recognized as one of many sectors of importance within the national economy-in this instance, the small- and medium-sized business sectors.
The Petitioner has not demonstrated that her proposed endeavor has significant potential to employ U.S. workers or otherwise offer substantial positive economic effects for the nation. Specifically, she has not shown that her business stands to provide substantial economic benefits to any particular locality or to the United States overall. While the business plan generally explains that her company's services would benefit the U.S. economy because they would facilitate the growth of small- and medium-sized businesses, these asserted national impacts are not sufficiently supported by objective evidence related to her particular proposed endeavor. It is not clear how a business of the size and scope described in the business plan would significantly impact the location ofits employees or clients, including by creating the claimed "ripple" effects in the economy. The Petitioner has not provided sufficient evidence to show that she would employ a significant population of workers in a particular region, nor has she shown that her proposed endeavor would offer substantial economic benefits through employment levels, business activity, or tax revenue. As such, the record does not demonstrate that the prospective benefits to the regional or national economy resulting from the Petitioner's endeavor would reach the level of "substantial positive economic effects" contemplated by Dhanasar. See Dhanasar at 890.
The record does not establish the national importance ofthe proposed endeavor as required by the first prong of the Dhanasar precedent decision. Therefore, the Petitioner has not demonstrated eligibility for a national interest waiver. Because the identified reasons for dismissal are dispositive of the Petitioner's appeal, we decline to reach and hereby reserve remaining arguments concerning eligibility under the Dhanasar framework. 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).
Conclusion
The Petitioner has not demonstrated that the proposed endeavor has national importance. As the Petitioner has not met the requisite first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework, she has not established that she is eligible for or otherwise merits a national interest waiver as a matter of discretion. The petition will remain denied.
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.
NOTICE: This constitutes the final decision in this matter. The filing of a motion will not postpone the effect of the decision. 8 C.F.R. § 103.S(a)(l)(iv). Aliens who are not lawfully present, or who are otherwise inadmissible or deportable, may be subject to the commencement of removal proceedings under section 240 ofthe Act through the issuance of a Form I-862, Notice to Appear. Those proceedings may result in their removal from the United States and possible ineligibility for future visas or other immigration benefits.