Date of Decision: MAR. 7, 2023
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-2 National Interest Waiver (NIW)
Field of Expertise: Civil Engineering
Petitioner Information
Profession: Civil Engineer
Field: Civil Engineering
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Dismissed
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Criterion 1: The Petitioner presented an official academic record showing she holds a relevant degree.
Criterion 2: The Petitioner demonstrated membership in professional associations, fulfilling the membership criterion.
Criteria Not Met:
Criterion 1: The Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence of recognition for achievements and significant contributions to the industry or field by peers, governmental entities, or professional or business organizations.
Criterion 2: The Petitioner did not meet at least three of the six regulatory criteria under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(ii)(A)-(F).
Key Points from the Decision
Proposed Endeavor:
The Petitioner aims to work as a civil engineer, focusing on projects that enhance infrastructure and contribute to public safety and environmental sustainability.
Substantial Merit and National Importance: The Petitioner argued the national importance of her work in civil engineering, particularly in developing sustainable infrastructure solutions.
Supporting Evidence: The evidence included an expert opinion letter, detailing the Petitioner’s educational background, professional experience, and a specific research project.
Inconsistencies in Proposed Endeavor:
The Director found that the expert opinion letter did not sufficiently demonstrate the Petitioner’s recognition for significant contributions to the field, and the Petitioner failed to meet the required number of criteria for exceptional ability classification.
Supporting Documentation
Letters of Intent: Not specified
Business Plan: Not specified
Advisory Letter: The Petitioner submitted a letter from Dr. J-A-L-, summarizing her qualifications and contributions, but it lacked detailed, probative information on her achievements and their significance.
Any other supporting documentation: Additional professional memberships and academic records were provided but did not fulfill all necessary criteria.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed.
Reasoning: The Petitioner did not meet the required criteria for exceptional ability classification, nor did she provide sufficient evidence to support her claim of significant contributions to the field. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed without a final merits determination on the national interest waiver.
