Date of Decision: October 19, 2023
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-2 National Interest Waiver (NIW)
Field of Expertise: Construction Project Management
Petitioner Information
Profession: Construction Project Manager
Field: Construction Project Management
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Dismissed
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
- Substantial Merit: The Director determined that the petitioner’s proposed endeavor as a construction project manager has substantial merit. The petitioner’s work in managing infrastructure projects and contributing to the construction industry is crucial to the U.S. economy, particularly in areas related to infrastructure improvement.
Criteria Not Met:
- National Importance: The petitioner failed to demonstrate that her proposed endeavor has national importance. Although the petitioner’s work in construction project management is important, the Director and the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) found that the petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to show how her work would impact the construction industry or the U.S. economy on a national scale. The evidence provided focused on the petitioner’s experience and the general importance of infrastructure projects, but did not establish that her specific contributions would have broader national implications.
Key Points from the Decision
Proposed Endeavor:
The petitioner proposed to continue her work as a construction project manager, focusing on consultancy, maintenance, repair, rehabilitation, and supervision of various infrastructure projects across the United States. She argued that her work would help improve the country’s infrastructure, economy, and employment rate. However, the Director found that the petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate how this endeavor would extend beyond her clients to have a broader impact on the U.S. construction industry or economy.
Substantial Merit and National Importance:
While the petitioner’s work in construction management is important, the decision concluded that it did not meet the threshold for national importance. The AAO noted that the petitioner’s business plan and supporting evidence focused more on the general importance of construction and infrastructure rather than the petitioner’s specific contributions to the field on a national level.
On balance, it would be beneficial to the United States to waive the requirements of the Labor Certification process:
The petitioner did not meet the first prong of the Dhanasar framework, which is essential for the national interest waiver. The lack of evidence supporting the national importance of her proposed activities made it difficult to justify waiving the labor certification process.
Supporting Evidence:
The petitioner provided personal statements, a business plan, and letters of support. However, these were insufficient to establish the national importance of her proposed endeavor. The evidence focused on the petitioner’s qualifications and the general importance of infrastructure development rather than demonstrating the specific impact of her work on a national scale.
Inconsistencies in Proposed Endeavor:
There were no major inconsistencies in the petition; however, the petitioner did not sufficiently demonstrate how her work as a construction project manager would have a significant impact on the U.S. construction industry or economy.
Supporting Documentation
Letters of Intent:
Not provided.
Business Plan:
Included but did not establish national importance or substantial positive economic effects.
Advisory Letter:
Included but focused primarily on the general significance of construction management rather than the petitioner’s specific contributions.
Any Other Supporting Documentation:
Included business documents and personal statements, which were insufficient to meet the national importance requirement.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed.
Reasoning: The petitioner did not meet the criteria for demonstrating that her proposed work as a construction project manager would have a significant national impact. The evidence provided was insufficient to support claims of substantial merit and national importance, and the petitioner did not establish eligibility for the EB-2 classification.
Download the Full Petition Review Here
