Date of Decision: February 21, 2023
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-2 National Interest Waiver (NIW)
Field of Expertise: Computer Engineering
Petitioner Information
Profession: Computer Engineer
Field: Computer Engineering
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Approved
Appeal Outcome: Moot
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
None: The Director’s decision did not render a finding as to whether the Petitioner qualifies as an advanced degree professional. The Director’s request for evidence (RFE) focused exclusively on whether the Beneficiary was well-positioned to advance the proposed endeavor under Dhanasar’s second prong, and the response was not acknowledged or discussed.
Criteria Not Met:
Substantial Merit: The Director’s decision did not render findings as to whether the proposed endeavor has substantial merit.
National Importance: The sole basis for the Director’s denial was that the record did not establish that the proposed endeavor has national importance.
Key Points from the Decision
Proposed Endeavor:
The Petitioner, a computer engineer, seeks classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree and a national interest waiver of the job offer requirement attached to this EB-2 classification.
Substantial Merit and National Importance:
The endeavor to employ the Beneficiary as a computer engineer was not sufficiently analyzed by the Director. The decision did not address whether the proposed endeavor has substantial merit or if the evidence satisfies the second and third prongs of the Dhanasar analytical framework.
Supporting Evidence:
The Petitioner’s response to the RFE, which focused on whether the Beneficiary was well-positioned to advance the proposed endeavor, was not acknowledged or discussed in the Director’s decision.
Inconsistencies in Proposed Endeavor:
The Director’s decision did not provide a complete analysis or sufficient findings regarding the proposed endeavor. The decision lacked a thorough examination of the Beneficiary’s qualifications as an advanced degree professional and did not assess the substantial merit or national importance of the proposed endeavor.
Supporting Documentation
Letters of Intent:
Not applicable.
Business Plan:
Not applicable.
Advisory Letter:
Not applicable.
Any other supporting documentation:
The record did not include a thorough analysis of the Petitioner’s qualifications or the proposed endeavor’s substantial merit and national importance.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The matter is remanded for the entry of a new decision consistent with the analysis provided.
Reasoning: The Director’s decision is insufficient for review as it did not establish whether the Petitioner qualifies as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree or if the proposed endeavor has substantial merit and national importance. The decision is remanded for a new determination, including a conclusion regarding the Beneficiary’s eligibility for the underlying EB-2 visa classification and an analysis of the evidence supporting that conclusion.
