Date of Decision: March 26, 2019
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-2 National Interest Waiver (NIW)
Field of Expertise: Business Development
Petitioner Information
Profession: Business Development Manager and Consultant
Field: Business Development
Nationality: [Nationality]
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Degree, Diploma, or Certificate:
The petitioner’s degrees from Bulgarian institutions were found to satisfy the criterion for having a relevant degree.
Criteria Not Met:
Equivalency to U.S. Advanced Degree:
The provided credential evaluation report did not sufficiently prove that the petitioner’s foreign diploma is equivalent to a U.S. advanced degree.
Exceptional Ability Criteria:
The petitioner did not meet at least three of the six regulatory criteria required to demonstrate exceptional ability.
Key Points from the Decision
Proposed Endeavor:
The petitioner seeks to continue her work as a business development manager and consultant, focusing on strategic growth and development initiatives to benefit various organizations.
Substantial Merit and National Importance:
The petitioner’s work in business development has potential merit, but the evidence provided did not demonstrate that her endeavors meet the national importance criterion as outlined in the Dhanasar framework.
Supporting Evidence:
The petitioner submitted her curriculum vitae, academic credentials, professional certifications, and evidence of her contributions to a recent book and professional conference participation. However, the documentation did not establish the required equivalency of her foreign degree or her exceptional ability.
Inconsistencies in Proposed Endeavor:
There were ambiguities regarding the equivalency of the petitioner’s foreign degree and the lack of sufficient evidence to prove exceptional ability. The petitioner’s provided documentation, such as the credential evaluation, did not resolve these inconsistencies.
Supporting Documentation
Letters of Intent:
Not applicable.
Business Plan:
Not applicable.
Advisory Letters:
The petitioner provided various documents to support her professional achievements and contributions, but they did not sufficiently meet the exceptional ability criteria.
Any other supporting documentation:
The petitioner resubmitted a credential evaluation and other documents which were previously deemed insufficient to prove the equivalency of her foreign degree to a U.S. advanced degree.
Conclusion
Final Determination:
The motion to reopen was denied. The petitioner did not establish eligibility as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree or as an individual of exceptional ability, nor did she demonstrate that her proposed endeavor meets the criteria for a national interest waiver.
Reasoning:
The petitioner’s evidence did not adequately prove the equivalency of her foreign degree to a U.S. advanced degree. Additionally, the petitioner did not meet the required criteria to demonstrate exceptional ability. The documentation provided did not sufficiently address the ambiguities and inconsistencies noted in previous decisions. Consequently, the petitioner did not satisfy the three prongs of the Dhanasar framework required for a national interest waiver.
