Date of Decision: June 4, 2024
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-2 National Interest Waiver (NIW)
Field of Expertise: Data Science
Petitioner Information
Profession: Data Scientist/Entrepreneur
Field: Data Science and Information Technology
Nationality: [Not Specified]
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
- Substantial Merit: The petitioner’s proposed endeavor, providing data science and IT consultancy services, was recognized for its substantial merit.
Criteria Not Met:
- National Importance: The petitioner did not sufficiently demonstrate that the proposed endeavor holds national importance.
- Well-Positioned to Advance: The petitioner did not establish that he is well-positioned to advance the proposed endeavor.
Key Points from the Decision
Proposed Endeavor:
The petitioner aimed to offer consultancy services to businesses through his company, focusing on data science solutions and IT consultancy. He planned to leverage his experience in designing and implementing data science solutions, specializing in solution architecture, leadership, and project management.
Substantial Merit and National Importance:
While the petitioner’s endeavor has substantial merit, it was not found to have national importance. The petitioner claimed that his solutions would benefit U.S. businesses and society by optimizing data-driven solutions. However, the evidence provided was insufficient to demonstrate that the impact of his work would extend beyond his clients to enhance societal welfare or have significant positive economic effects on a national scale.
Supporting Evidence:
The petitioner submitted various documents, including recommendation letters, a business plan, a personal statement, industry reports, and articles. These documents aimed to highlight the importance of digital transformation and the petitioner’s role in driving market expansion through digital technology.
Inconsistencies in Proposed Endeavor:
The record did not provide adequate corroborating evidence to show that the petitioner’s specific proposed work offers broader implications in his field or significant enhancements to U.S. societal welfare.
Supporting Documentation
Letters of Intent:
Summarized the petitioner’s intended consultancy services and the expected impact on client operations.
Business Plan:
Outlined the petitioner’s goals, including job creation and revenue projections, but lacked sufficient evidence of national importance.
Advisory Letter:
Included recommendations and endorsements but did not sufficiently demonstrate the national importance of the endeavor.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was denied. The petitioner did not demonstrate that the proposed endeavor met the requirements of the national importance criterion.
Reasoning:
The petitioner failed to provide sufficient evidence that his proposed endeavor would have a significant impact on a national scale. The documentation did not establish that the endeavor’s benefits would extend beyond the petitioner’s immediate clients to contribute broadly to U.S. societal welfare or economic interests.
Download the Full Petition Review Here
