The Petitioner, a marketing manager in the health consultancy field, seeks second preference immigrant classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree, as well as a national interest waiver ofthe 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 that although the Petitioner qualified as an advanced degree professional, he had not established that a waiver of the required job offer, and thus of the labor certification, would be in the national interest. 1 The matter is now before us on appeal. 8 C.F.R. § 103.3.
The Petitioner bears the burden of proof 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.
If a petitioner demonstrates eligibility for the underlying EB-2 classification, 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 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 discretion2 , 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 their proposed endeavor; and
- On balance, waiving the job offer requirement would benefit the United States.
The Petitioner proposes to offer his expertise as a marketing manager in the health consultancy field "to assist U.S. companies, businesses, and organizations in need of branding, re-organization, and management to optimize and increase profit through growth within their industry market or expand into other markets."
The first prong of the Dhanasar framework, 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. In determining whether the proposed endeavor has national importance, we consider its potential prospective impact. Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889.
In her decision, the Director determined that the Petitioner's proposed endeavor is of substantial merit, and we agree. Turning to the national importance of his endeavor, the Director concluded that the Petitioner did not establish that his proposed endeavor has national importance.
On appeal, the Petitioner contends that the Director did not give due regard to his professional plan and statement; letters of recommendation; and industry reports and articles. In addition, the Petitioner relies, in part, on his over 18 years of experience in marketing and sales in the health consultancy field to establish the national importance of his proposed endeavor. However, the Petitioner's expertise and record of success in previous positions are considerations under Dhanasar's second prong, which "shifts the focus from the proposed endeavor to the foreign national." Id. at 890. The issue here is whether the Petitioner has demonstrated, by a preponderance of the evidence, the national importance of his proposed work.
We reviewed the Petitioner's letters of recommendation from his professional acquaintances. The authors praise the Petitioner's abilities in the marketing and sales consulting sector, and the personal attributes that make him an asset to the workplace. While the recommendation letters evidence the high regard the Petitioner's professional acquaintances have for the Petitioner and his work, none of them offer persuasive detail concerning the impact of the Petitioner's proposed endeavor or how such impact would extend beyond his clients. As such, the letters are not probative of the Petitioner's eligibility under the first prong of Dhanasar.
Through industry reports and articles, the Petitioner emphasized the importance of marketing in businesses. We agree that the field of marketing is important, and that success in the field may lead to greater career opportunities and economic advantages. However, 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 specific endeavor that the foreign national proposes to undertake." See Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. 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.
In Dhanasar, we determined the petitioner's teaching activities did not rise to the level of having national importance because they would not impact his field more broadly. Id. at 893. Likewise, the Petitioner has not established how providing his service as a marketing manager in the health consultancy sector stands to sufficiently extend beyond his clients to impact the field more broadly at a level commensurate with national importance.No broader implications shown
Furthermore, we reviewed the Petitioner's professional plan and statement, which asserts that his proposed endeavor "will have a significant socioeconomic impact on a national and international scale" and therefore "will create jobs in the U.S." However, the Petitioner has not demonstrated that the specific endeavor he proposes to undertake has significant potential to employ U.S. workers or otherwise offers substantial positive economic effects for our nation.Job creation or economic claims unsupported Without sufficient information or evidence regarding any projected U.S. economic impact or job creation directly attributable to his future work, the record does not show that benefits to the U.S. regional or national economy resulting from the Petitioner's services as a marketing manager would reach the level of "substantial positive economic effects" contemplated by Dhanasar. Id. at 890. Accordingly, the Petitioner's proposed work does not meet the first prong of the Dhanasar framework.
Because the Petitioner has not established eligibility under the first prong of the Dhanasar test, we need not address his eligibility under the remaining prongs, and we hereby reserve them. 3 The burden of proof is on the Petitioner to establish that he meets each eligibility requirement ofthe benefit sought by a preponderance of the evidence. Matter of Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. at 375-376. The Petitioner has not done so here and, therefore, we conclude that he has not established eligibility for a national interest waiver as a matter of discretion.
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.