Date of Decision: January 3, 2019
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-2 National Interest Waiver (NIW)
Field of Expertise: Engineering Consulting
Petitioner Information
Profession: Engineering Consultant
Field: Structural Engineering
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Advanced Degree: The Petitioner provided evidence of holding a Bachelor of Science and a Master of Science in Civil Engineering, qualifying as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree.
Criteria Not Met:
National Importance: The Petitioner did not demonstrate that the proposed endeavor has substantial merit and national importance. While the endeavor has merit, it does not rise to the level of national importance required for the national interest waiver.
Economic Impact: The Petitioner failed to provide sufficient evidence of the potential for significant positive economic effects or employment opportunities on a national scale.
Key Points from the Decision
Proposed Endeavor:
The Petitioner proposed to work as a self-employed consulting engineer and entrepreneur, offering a wide range of structural engineering services, including structural analysis and design, project consulting, forensic investigations, renewable energy engineering, and more. Additionally, the Petitioner planned to engage in the renewable energy sector, specifically solar power energy projects.
Substantial Merit and National Importance:
The Petitioner’s proposed work in engineering consulting and renewable energy has merit. However, the evidence provided was insufficient to demonstrate that the endeavor would have a significant impact beyond the Petitioner’s projects and clients. The proposed work did not show broader implications for the field of structural engineering or significant potential to employ U.S. workers or provide substantial positive economic effects.
Supporting Evidence:
Initial Submission: Included the Form I-140 petition, educational credentials, and a business plan outlining the proposed engineering services and future staffing plans.
Further Submission on Appeal: Provided information on past projects, potential job creation, and articles on the economic impact of construction activities.
Inconsistencies in Proposed Endeavor:
The main inconsistency was the lack of sufficient evidence to demonstrate the national importance of the Petitioner’s proposed endeavor. While the business plan and letters of interest showed local impact, they did not establish broader national significance or substantial economic benefits.
Supporting Documentation
Letters of Intent:
Provided letters from potential clients expressing interest in the Petitioner’s services.
Business Plan:
Included a detailed plan for the proposed consulting engineering services and renewable energy projects.
Advisory Letter:
Not applicable in this case.
Any other supporting documentation:
Past Project Information: Described past projects in Canada, Indonesia, and Texas, but did not identify future U.S. projects of similar scale.
Economic Impact Articles: Submitted articles discussing the economic impact of construction and housing development, but these were not directly linked to the Petitioner’s specific proposed projects.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed.
Reasoning: The Petitioner did not meet the burden of proof required to establish eligibility for the national interest waiver. The proposed endeavor, while meritorious, did not demonstrate the level of national importance required under the Dhanasar framework. The Petitioner’s plans did not show sufficient broader implications or significant potential for positive economic effects on a national scale. Consequently, the initial decision to deny the petition was upheld, and the appeal was dismissed. The Petitioner must provide stronger evidence of national importance and economic impact in any future filings to establish eligibility.
