Date of Decision: September 10, 2018
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-2 National Interest Waiver (NIW)
Field of Expertise: Alternative Medicine Research, Homeopathy
Petitioner Information
Profession: Alternative Medicine Researcher
Field: Homeopathy, Autism Research
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Dismissed
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Substantial Merit: The Petitioner successfully demonstrated that his proposed research on the use of homeopathy in treating autism has substantial merit. The research aims to improve the quality of life for individuals with autism by investigating the link between autism and gastrointestinal dysfunction, skin problems, and liver dysfunction.
Criteria Not Met:
National Importance: The Director found that the Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate that his research would have a broader impact beyond his immediate patients. The documentation provided did not establish that his clinical work would impact the homeopathic medicine field or the healthcare industry more broadly, as opposed to being limited to the patients he serves.
Well-Positioned to Advance the Proposed Endeavor: Although the Petitioner has experience in homeopathic treatment and research, he did not demonstrate that he is well-positioned to advance his proposed research in the United States. The Petitioner claimed to have authored several books and worked with top researchers, but the record did not include sufficient evidence to corroborate these claims or to show significant interest in his work from other researchers, institutions, or relevant entities in the U.S.
Balancing Factors: Since the Petitioner did not establish that he is well-positioned to advance his research, the petition did not satisfy the second prong of the Dhanasar framework. Therefore, the request to waive the labor certification requirement was not justified.
Key Points from the Decision
Proposed Endeavor:
The Petitioner sought to continue his research in the U.S. on the use of homeopathy to treat autism and its associated conditions. He emphasized his intent to improve treatment options for autism and to investigate its link to other medical conditions. However, the Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate that his work would have a national impact or broader implications for the healthcare industry.
Substantial Merit and National Importance:
While the Petitioner’s work in homeopathy and autism research is valuable, the evidence provided did not establish that it would have a broader national impact beyond his immediate clinical practice.
On balance, it would be beneficial to the United States to waive the requirements of the Labor Certification process:
The Petitioner did not meet the first two prongs of the Dhanasar framework, so the national interest waiver request was denied.
Supporting Evidence:
The Petitioner provided documentation of his academic credentials, professional memberships, research publications, and letters of support from colleagues in Korea. However, this evidence was insufficient to demonstrate that his proposed research would have a significant impact or that he was well-positioned to advance the research in the U.S.
Inconsistencies in Proposed Endeavor:
The primary issue was the Petitioner’s failure to demonstrate that his work would extend beyond his immediate clinical practice and have a national impact in the field of homeopathic medicine.
Supporting Documentation
Letters of Intent:
The Petitioner provided letters from colleagues in Korea, but these were insufficient to demonstrate national importance.
Business Plan:
No specific business plan was summarized in the decision.
Advisory Letter:
Letters from colleagues were provided but did not sufficiently address the national importance or the Petitioner’s positioning to advance his research.
Any Other Supporting Documentation:
The Petitioner did not provide additional documentation that would have addressed the Director’s concerns regarding the national importance and broader impact of his proposed research.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed.
Reasoning: The Petitioner failed to demonstrate that his proposed work in homeopathy and autism research met the national importance criteria required for a national interest waiver. Additionally, the evidence provided did not establish that the Petitioner is well-positioned to advance his research in the U.S. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, and the previous decision to deny the petition was upheld.
