Date of Decision: May 25, 2023
Service Center: Texas 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 Consultancy
Nationality: [Not specified]
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Advanced Degree: The Petitioner qualifies as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree.
Criteria Not Met:
National Importance: The Petitioner did not establish that his proposed endeavor has national importance.
Well-Positioned to Advance the Endeavor: The evidence provided was insufficient to demonstrate that the Petitioner is well-positioned to advance his proposed endeavor.
Waiver Benefit: The Petitioner did not demonstrate that waiving the job offer requirement would benefit the United States.
Key Points from the Decision
Proposed Endeavor:
The Petitioner proposed to continue his work in the field of civil engineering as the president of his consulting company, which would manage projects within various industries for clients in Florida and Massachusetts and train others using his methods.
Substantial Merit and National Importance:
The decision found that while the proposed endeavor has merit, it did not rise to the level of national importance. The Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to show that his consulting services would have a significant impact on U.S. infrastructure or the economy.
Quotes and References: The decision noted that the Petitioner’s business plan included discrepancies in its projections and lacked a credible source or rationale for the calculations. The Petitioner’s endeavor did not demonstrate potential substantial positive economic effects as required by the Dhanasar framework.
Supporting Evidence:
The Petitioner provided a business plan, testimonial letters, and articles discussing U.S. infrastructure needs. However, the evidence did not sufficiently demonstrate the broader implications or significant potential impact of the proposed endeavor.
Quotes and References: The decision stated that the letters of endorsement did not provide specific, detailed information showing the national importance of the Petitioner’s proposed endeavor.
Inconsistencies in Proposed Endeavor:
The Director’s decision noted that the business plan lacked detailed support for its employment and revenue projections and did not establish the credibility of the information provided.
Supporting Documentation
Letters of Intent:
N/A
Business Plan:
The Petitioner’s business plan outlined the proposed consulting business’s goals, strategies, and financial projections. However, it lacked detailed support and credible information for its projections.
Advisory Letter:
N/A
Any other supporting documentation:
The Petitioner submitted additional documents, including media articles and reports on U.S. infrastructure, but these were insufficient to establish the national importance of the proposed endeavor.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed. The Petitioner did not meet the criteria required for a national interest waiver under the Dhanasar framework.
Reasoning:
The Petitioner failed to demonstrate that his proposed endeavor has national importance, that he is well-positioned to advance the endeavor, or that waiving the job offer requirement would benefit the United States. The evidence provided did not adequately support the claims made in the business plan or show significant potential for broader impact beyond the firm’s direct clients.
