Date of Decision: September 14, 2022
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-2 National Interest Waiver (NIW)
Field of Expertise: Directing and Producing
Petitioner Information
Profession: Director and Producer
Field: Directing and Producing
Nationality: Not Specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Advanced Degree: The Petitioner holds the equivalent of a U.S. bachelor’s degree.
Criteria Not Met:
Five Years of Post-Baccalaureate Experience: The Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence of at least five years of progressive post-baccalaureate experience in the specialty.
Employment Letters from Employers: The Petitioner did not provide employment letters from current or former employers that meet the regulatory requirements.
Resolution of Discrepancies: The Petitioner did not resolve discrepancies in the employment history and supporting documentation.
Key Points from the Decision
Proposed Endeavor:
The Petitioner aims to work as a director and producer in the United States, leveraging his extensive experience in directing and producing various media projects. His proposed endeavor includes managing and producing content for U.S. companies and contributing to the cultural and entertainment industries.
Substantial Merit and National Importance:
While the Petitioner demonstrated substantial merit in his field, the evidence provided was insufficient to demonstrate that his proposed endeavor has national importance. The Petitioner made general claims about the potential benefits of his work but did not provide specific evidence to support these claims. The documentation did not adequately show that his proposed work would have a significant impact on the U.S. economy or cultural interests.
Supporting Evidence:
The Petitioner submitted a variety of documents, including letters from an outside accountant and a business partner, an education and experience evaluation, his resume, and a copy of his “Labor and Social Security” document from the Ministry of Labor and Employment. However, the evidence did not demonstrate that the Petitioner’s work experience met the required criteria for exceptional ability. The letters from the accountant and business partner did not qualify as letters from current or former employers, and they did not address whether the position was full-time.
Inconsistencies in Proposed Endeavor:
The Petitioner’s proposed endeavor had inconsistencies, such as the discrepancy between the claimed work experience and the actual documented experience. The Petitioner did not provide clear evidence of recognition for achievements and significant contributions to the industry.
Supporting Documentation
Letters of Intent:
None specified.
Business Plan:
Not applicable.
Advisory Letter:
Advisory letters described the Petitioner’s expertise but did not establish the national importance of his proposed endeavor.
Any Other Supporting Documentation:
The Petitioner provided additional documentation, including employment letters and academic evaluations, but these did not resolve the inconsistencies in his proposed endeavor or establish the required level of national importance.
Conclusion
The appeal was dismissed because the Petitioner did not establish that he meets the regulatory requirements for the EB-2 classification as an individual of exceptional ability. The Petitioner failed to demonstrate the required qualifying experience and the job’s need for an advanced degree professional. Consequently, the Petitioner did not qualify for a national interest waiver.
