Date of Decision: MAR. 6, 2023
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-2 National Interest Waiver (NIW)
Field of Expertise: Dental Science
Petitioner Information
Profession: Dentist
Field: Dental Science
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Dismissed
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Criterion 1: The Petitioner submitted a business plan for the establishment of a dental clinic in the United States, demonstrating an entrepreneurial endeavor.
Criterion 2: The Petitioner provided an agreement with a licensed dentist in the United States to establish a dental practice together.
Criteria Not Met:
Criterion 1: The Petitioner did not resolve the discrepancy between working as a medical scientist and operating a dental clinic, failing to clarify the specific proposed endeavor.
Criterion 2: The Petitioner did not provide evidence of prior or ongoing original research, crucial for demonstrating substantial merit and national importance in the medical scientist role.
Key Points from the Decision
Proposed Endeavor: The Petitioner described her proposed endeavor as “working as a Medical Scientist in the Dental field,” focusing on conducting research to understand human diseases and improve overall human health. However, she also submitted a business plan to establish a dental clinic, leading to conflicting information about her proposed activities.
Substantial Merit and National Importance: The Petitioner did not provide sufficient details about the specific research she intended to conduct as a medical scientist, making it challenging to evaluate the merit and national importance of her endeavor. The business plan for a dental clinic did not align with the research-oriented role of a medical scientist.
Supporting Evidence: The evidence included a business plan for a dental clinic and a tentative agreement with a licensed dentist, but lacked clarity on how these related to the stated research objectives.
Inconsistencies in Proposed Endeavor: The Petitioner did not adequately reconcile the conflicting information about her proposed endeavor. While she initially described a research-focused role, the submitted evidence primarily supported an entrepreneurial venture in dental practice.
Supporting Documentation
Letters of Intent: Not specified
Business Plan: The business plan detailed the establishment of a dental clinic but did not address the proposed research activities.
Advisory Letter: Not specified
Any other supporting documentation: The agreement with a licensed dentist supported the dental practice endeavor but did not relate to the medical scientist role.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed.
Reasoning: The Petitioner did not sufficiently identify her proposed endeavor, leading to an inability to determine whether it had substantial merit and national importance. Without clarifying the specific endeavor, further analysis under the Dhanasar framework was not possible, resulting in the dismissal of the appeal.
