Date of Decision: March 7, 2024
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-2 National Interest Waiver (NIW)
Field of Expertise: Financial Management
Petitioner Information
Profession: Financial Controller
Field: Financial Management
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
- Advanced Degree Professional: The petitioner was recognized as a professional holding an advanced degree.
- Economic Impact: Attempted to demonstrate significant economic impact through his role.
Criteria Not Met:
- National Interest Waiver: Failed to prove that his work waives the job offer and labor certification requirements based on national interest.
- Document Authenticity and Relevance: The evidence provided did not conclusively support the claims made about hiring and economic impact.
Key Points from the Decision
Proposed Endeavor:
The petitioner aimed to demonstrate his impact on the U.S. economy through his role in financial management within the oil and gas industry, claiming substantial control over budgets and vendor engagement.
Substantial Merit and National Importance:
The petitioner’s efforts to show his role’s substantial merit and national importance were not sufficiently substantiated. The provided documents did not effectively connect his activities to a broader economic or national benefit.
Supporting Evidence:
The petitioner provided a payroll report and a vendor engagement list intended to illustrate his significant economic impact. However, these documents were not authenticated and lacked sufficient detail to be considered reliable evidence.
Inconsistencies in Proposed Endeavor:
The documents submitted did not clearly establish the claimed employment of 45 U.S.-based employees or engagement with 80 U.S. vendors. There were also inconsistencies in document formatting and content that raised questions about their authenticity.
Supporting Documentation
Letters of Intent:
Not applicable.
Business Plan:
Not applicable.
Advisory Letter:
Not applicable.
Any Other Supporting Documentation:
The lists provided were critiqued for lack of authenticity and insufficient detail to support the claims.
Conclusion
The final determination was that the appeal to reopen the decision was dismissed. The evidence provided did not introduce new, probative facts sufficient to overturn the initial denial. The issues with document authenticity and relevance significantly undermined the petitioner’s claims.
