Date of Decision: January 10, 2024
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-2 National Interest Waiver (NIW)
Field of Expertise: Pharmaceuticals and Diagnostic Laboratory Management
Petitioner Information
Profession: Entrepreneur
Field: Pharmaceuticals and Diagnostic Laboratory Management
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
- Substantial Merit: The proposed endeavor was recognized for its substantial merit in providing affordable healthcare.
Criteria Not Met:
- National Importance: The petitioner failed to demonstrate that the proposed endeavor has national importance. The impact was seen as limited to the petitioner’s own company without broader implications.
Key Points from the Decision
Proposed Endeavor:
The petitioner aims to operate a clinical analysis laboratory in Florida, providing high-quality, affordable healthcare services and expanding to a full health clinic.
Substantial Merit and National Importance:
While the endeavor was noted for substantial merit, it failed to demonstrate national importance. The impact was deemed limited to the direct clientele, lacking broader implications within the healthcare industry or economy.
Supporting Evidence:
The evidence included a business plan and financial forecasts but lacked comprehensive documentation on broader economic impacts or detailed operational funding plans.
Inconsistencies in Proposed Endeavor:
There were inconsistencies in demonstrating the broader economic impact and employment potential of the proposed endeavor beyond the immediate region.
Supporting Documentation
Business Plan:
Outlined intentions for a low-cost medical clinic and laboratory, projecting $875,000 in revenue by the third year, but lacked detailed financial backing or broader economic impact evidence.
Conclusion
Final Determination:
The petitioner did not meet the first prong of the Dhanasar framework for national interest waiver due to insufficient evidence of national importance. The appeal was dismissed, and the initial denial upheld.
Reasoning:
The decision was primarily based on the limited scope of impact and the insufficient demonstration of substantial positive economic effects beyond the petitioner’s direct operations.
