Date of Decision: September 15, 2021
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-2 National Interest Waiver (NIW)
Field of Expertise: Carpet Weaving
Petitioner Information
Profession: Carpet Weaver
Field: Carpet Weaving
Nationality: Not Specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Dismissed
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
- None: The petitioner did not establish eligibility as an individual of exceptional ability.
Criteria Not Met:
- Eligibility for Advanced Degree Classification: The petitioner did not assert qualification as an advanced degree professional but rather claimed exceptional ability.
- Exceptional Ability: The petitioner did not satisfy the required criteria for exceptional ability in the field of carpet weaving.
- National Importance: The petitioner did not sufficiently demonstrate the substantial merit and national importance of his proposed endeavor.
- Well Positioned to Advance: The petitioner did not sufficiently demonstrate that he is well positioned to advance his proposed endeavor.
Key Points from the Decision
Proposed Endeavor:
The petitioner proposed to work as a carpet weaver and to establish a weaving business in the United States. He claimed to have authored a book on carpet weaving and presented it as evidence of his exceptional ability.
Substantial Merit and National Importance:
While the petitioner’s work in carpet weaving has substantial merit, the evidence did not sufficiently demonstrate the national importance of his specific proposed endeavor. The petitioner’s submission included a book purportedly authored by him, which was meant to support his claim of exceptional ability and national importance. However, upon further review, significant portions of the book were found to have been copied from other sources, calling into question the authenticity and originality of the work.
Well Positioned to Advance the Proposed Endeavor:
The petitioner provided documentation of his professional experience and the book he claimed to have written. However, the evidence was insufficient to demonstrate that he is well positioned to advance his proposed endeavor. The review revealed that the book contained language identical to several other sources, undermining the credibility of the petitioner’s claimed achievements and expertise. Additionally, the petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence of recognition for achievements and contributions to the field by peers, governmental entities, or professional organizations.
On balance, it would be beneficial to the United States to waive the requirements of the Labor Certification process:
The petitioner did not provide adequate justification for waiving the labor certification process. The evidence was insufficient to prove the national interest in the petitioner’s contributions. The submission of falsified documents further weakened the petitioner’s case for a national interest waiver.
Supporting Evidence:
The petitioner submitted a book, professional experience documentation, and letters of support. However, these were not sufficient to demonstrate the national importance of his proposed endeavor or that he is well positioned to advance it. The copied content in the book raised significant concerns about the authenticity and credibility of the submitted evidence.
Inconsistencies in Proposed Endeavor:
The petitioner’s evidence did not sufficiently demonstrate the potential broader impact of his proposed endeavor. The inconsistencies and misrepresentation of material facts further undermined the petitioner’s case.
Supporting Documentation
Letters of Intent: Not provided
Business Plan: Not provided or summarized in the decision
Advisory Letter: Not provided
Other Supporting Documentation: Included a book, professional experience documentation, and letters of support, which were insufficient to establish the broader national importance of the petitioner’s proposed endeavor due to the identified misrepresentations.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed.
Reasoning: The petitioner did not establish eligibility as an individual of exceptional ability and did not demonstrate that his proposed endeavor has national importance or that it would be beneficial to waive the labor certification process. The petitioner’s submission of falsified documents further invalidated his case for a national interest waiver.
Download the Full Petition Review Here
