Date of Decision: October 14, 2015
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-2 National Interest Waiver (NIW)
Field of Expertise: Education
Petitioner Information
Profession: Educator
Field: Family and Consumer Science Teaching
Nationality: [Nationality Not Specified]
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Substantial Intrinsic Merit:
The petitioner’s employment as an educator was found to be in an area of substantial intrinsic merit.
Criteria Not Met:
National Scope:
The benefits of the petitioner’s work were not considered national in scope. The Director noted that while education is of national interest, the impact of a single teacher in one school does not meet the requirement of being national in scope for the purposes of waiving the job offer requirement.
Greater Degree of National Interest:
The petitioner did not demonstrate that her work serves the national interest to a substantially greater degree than an available U.S. worker with the same qualifications.
Key Points from the Decision
Proposed Endeavor:
The petitioner aimed to develop new health curricula based on concerns about over-the-counter emergency contraception. Her proposal was to educate teens and pre-teens about the risks associated with the use of emergency contraceptive pills.
Substantial Merit and National Importance:
While the petitioner’s work in education was recognized for its intrinsic merit, the scope was deemed too localized. The petitioner’s impact did not extend beyond the institutions where she taught. The proposed endeavor did not demonstrate a national framework or interest.
Key Quotes:
- “The impact of a single teacher in one school would not be national in scope.”
- “The record does not establish that the petitioner’s proposed employment is within a framework that typically has a national impact.”
Supporting Evidence:
The petitioner provided letters and evidence from her teaching career, including involvement in health education and extracurricular activities. However, these did not substantiate a national impact.
Key Quotes:
- “The petitioner has not demonstrated the existence of a national framework for health curricula or that she proposes to work as a curriculum consultant nationwide.”
- “There is no evidence that the petitioner’s abstract has influenced the field as a whole.”
Inconsistencies in Proposed Endeavor:
There were no major inconsistencies noted in the proposed endeavor itself, but the petitioner failed to demonstrate the broader national impact required for the waiver.
Supporting Documentation
Letters of Intent:
Letters from the petitioner’s colleagues and institutions outlined her roles and contributions but did not establish national influence.
Business Plan:
Not applicable.
Advisory Letter:
Letters provided did not demonstrate how the petitioner’s work influenced the field beyond her local area.
Other Supporting Documentation:
Included participation in events and a magazine committee, but these did not establish national impact.
Conclusion
Final Determination: Denied
Reasoning: The petitioner did not meet the necessary criteria for a national interest waiver. Specifically, she did not demonstrate that her work had a national scope or that her achievements were significantly greater than those of other qualified U.S. workers.
