Date of Decision: January 10, 2019
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-2 National Interest Waiver (NIW)
Field of Expertise: Renewable Energy
Petitioner Information
Profession: Chief Engineer
Field: Chemical Engineering in Renewable Energy
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Advanced Degree: The Petitioner demonstrated that the Beneficiary holds a foreign equivalent of a U.S. advanced degree in chemical engineering. The Beneficiary earned a civilingenjörsexamen (a Swedish master’s degree) in chemical engineering.
Criteria Not Met:
Minimum Educational Requirements: The Petitioner did not demonstrate that the Beneficiary’s degree is equivalent to a U.S. master’s degree according to the Electronic Database for Global Education (EDGE), which states that a civilingenjörsexamen is equivalent to a U.S. bachelor’s degree.
Ability to Pay Proffered Wage: The Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence of its ability to pay the proffered wage of $200,000 per year from the priority date of June 16, 2017, onward. The financial documentation for 2017 was incomplete.
Key Points from the Decision
Proposed Endeavor:
The Petitioner, a renewable energy company that converts sugarcane waste into a coal-substitute fuel, seeks to employ the Beneficiary as a chief engineer. The role involves overseeing the engineering processes involved in converting biomass into renewable energy sources.
Substantial Merit and National Importance:
The decision did not specifically address the substantial merit and national importance of the Beneficiary’s proposed endeavor in renewable energy. The primary focus was on the educational qualifications of the Beneficiary and the Petitioner’s ability to pay the proffered wage.
Supporting Evidence:
Initial Submission: Included the Form I-140 petition, labor certification, educational credentials, and financial statements.
Further Submission on Appeal: Provided additional educational evaluations and financial records, but these were found insufficient.
Inconsistencies in Proposed Endeavor:
The main inconsistencies were related to the educational equivalency of the Beneficiary’s degree and the Petitioner’s ability to pay the proffered wage. The Beneficiary’s degree was not recognized as equivalent to a U.S. master’s degree according to reliable sources, and the Petitioner did not submit the required financial documentation for 2017.
Supporting Documentation
Letters of Intent:
Not applicable in this case.
Business Plan:
Not applicable in this case.
Advisory Letter:
Not applicable in this case.
Any other supporting documentation:
Educational Evaluations: Two independent evaluations concluding that the Beneficiary’s degree is equivalent to a U.S. master’s degree. However, these evaluations were not sufficiently detailed and conflicted with the EDGE database.
Financial Records: Audited financial statements for 2015 and 2016, and federal income tax returns of the parent company for 2016. However, no financial documentation for 2017 was provided.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed.
Reasoning:
The Petitioner did not meet the burden of proof required to establish eligibility for the immigration benefit sought. The Beneficiary’s degree was not recognized as equivalent to a U.S. master’s degree, and the Petitioner did not demonstrate its ability to pay the proffered wage from the priority date onward. Consequently, the initial decision to deny the petition was upheld, and the appeal was dismissed. The Petitioner must address these deficiencies in any future filings to establish eligibility.
