Date of Decision: August 12, 2021
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-2 National Interest Waiver (NIW)
Field of Expertise: Counterterrorism and Security
Petitioner Information
Profession: Counterterrorism Security Expert
Field: Counterterrorism and Security
Nationality: Not Specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Dismissed
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
- Advanced Degree Qualification: The petitioner qualifies as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree, with qualifications in counterterrorism and security management.
Criteria Not Met:
- Substantial Merit and National Importance: The petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the proposed endeavor has both substantial merit and national importance.
- Well-Positioned to Advance the Proposed Endeavor: The petitioner did not sufficiently demonstrate that he is well positioned to advance his proposed endeavor in counterterrorism and security.
Key Points from the Decision
Proposed Endeavor:
The petitioner, a counterterrorism security expert, proposed to employ his expertise to strengthen the homeland security of the United States. He described his prospective endeavor to include efforts in security management, security risk assessment, intelligence gathering, armed group trends, ethnic conflicts, conflict resolution, peacekeeping, disarmament, demobilization, and rehabilitation. The petitioner aimed to support and provide consulting for government aid or security agencies, such as USAID and the U.S. Department of State’s Bureau for Population, Refugees, and Migration.
Substantial Merit and National Importance:
While the petitioner’s proposed endeavor in counterterrorism and security has substantial merit, the Director concluded that the petitioner did not demonstrate its national importance. The evidence provided did not show that his work would significantly impact the broader U.S. security infrastructure or counterterrorism efforts 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 his work would enhance national security and counterterrorism efforts in the United States. However, the Director found insufficient evidence to support these claims. The proposed work did not show substantial potential to employ U.S. workers or provide notable security benefits that would justify waiving the labor certification process.
Supporting Evidence:
The petitioner submitted various documents, including academic records, letters of support, articles discussing national security issues, and government reports addressing security concerns. However, these documents did not sufficiently demonstrate that his specific endeavor would have a significant national impact.
Inconsistencies in Proposed Endeavor:
The petitioner’s statements about the broader impact of his work were not supported by sufficient evidence to demonstrate its national importance. Additionally, there were inconsistencies in the petitioner’s documentation of his proposed activities and their impact on national security.
Supporting Documentation
Letters of Intent:
Not applicable.
Business Plan:
Not provided or summarized in the decision.
Advisory Letter:
Provided but not sufficiently detailed to support the national importance of the petitioner’s work.
Any Other Supporting Documentation:
The petitioner provided articles and support letters, but these did not adequately demonstrate the national importance of his work.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed.
Reasoning: The petitioner did not meet the criteria for demonstrating the national importance of his proposed endeavor and did not provide sufficient justification for waiving the labor certification process. The proposed work was deemed to have limited impact beyond his direct security consulting activities.
Download the Full Petition Review Here
