Date of Decision: April 22, 2021
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-2 National Interest Waiver (NIW)
Field of Expertise: Clinical Research Coordination
Petitioner Information
Profession: Clinical Research Coordinator
Field: Clinical Research Coordination
Nationality: Not Specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Dismissed
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
- Advanced Degree Qualification: The Director determined that the petitioner qualifies as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree.
Criteria Not Met:
- National Importance: The petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate that waiving the job offer requirement would be in the national interest.
Key Points from the Decision
Proposed Endeavor:
The petitioner, a clinical research coordinator, seeks to work with a healthcare or research facility to conduct important research in various areas of mental health and provide expert advice and training to other professionals and students in the field. The petitioner plans to coordinate research projects, maintain records, oversee subject enrollment, monitor study activities for compliance, and train other professionals based on her knowledge and skills.
Substantial Merit and National Importance:
While the petitioner’s proposed endeavor in mental health research has substantial merit, the Director concluded that the petitioner did not demonstrate its national importance. The evidence provided did not show that her work would significantly impact the broader U.S. healthcare or mental health research sectors at a national level.
On balance, it would be beneficial to the United States to waive the requirements of the Labor Certification process:
The petitioner argued that her work would contribute to better treatment plans and new techniques in mental health care. However, the Director found insufficient evidence to support these claims. The proposed work did not show significant potential to employ U.S. workers or provide substantial positive effects on mental health care to justify waiving the labor certification process.
Supporting Evidence:
The petitioner submitted various documents, including academic records, professional plans, and support letters. However, these documents did not sufficiently demonstrate that her specific endeavor would have a significant national impact.
Inconsistencies in Proposed Endeavor:
There were inconsistencies in the petitioner’s statements about her proposed endeavor. Initially, she intended to work with healthcare facilities on mental health research, but later included intentions to focus on artificial intelligence, data science, and entrepreneurship without providing sufficient explanation for this change.
Supporting Documentation
Letters of Intent:
Not applicable.
Business Plan:
Not provided or summarized in the decision.
Advisory Letter:
Not provided or summarized in the decision.
Any Other Supporting Documentation:
The petitioner provided general support letters and professional plans but did not link these to her specific work in a way that demonstrated national importance.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed.
Reasoning: The petitioner did not meet the criteria for demonstrating the national importance of her proposed endeavor and did not provide sufficient justification for waiving the labor certification process. The proposed work was deemed to have limited impact beyond her direct research activities.
