Date of Decision: October 28, 2022
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-2 National Interest Waiver (NIW)
Field of Expertise: Freestyle Wrestling
Petitioner Information
Profession: Freestyle Wrestling Athlete and Coach
Field: Freestyle Wrestling, Athletic Coaching
Nationality: Not Specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Exceptional Ability: The Petitioner qualified as an individual of exceptional ability in the field of freestyle wrestling.
Criteria Not Met:
National Importance: The Petitioner did not sufficiently demonstrate that his proposed endeavor in freestyle wrestling has national importance.
Key Points from the Decision
Proposed Endeavor:
The Petitioner aims to increase the athletic competitiveness of U.S. athletes on the national and international levels by representing a university wrestling club, competing in national wrestling competitions, and coaching other freestyle wrestling athletes.
Substantial Merit and National Importance:
While the Petitioner’s proposed endeavor has substantial merit, it did not meet the national importance criterion. The evidence provided was insufficient to demonstrate that his involvement in wrestling competitions and coaching would have broader implications at a level consistent with national importance. The Petitioner’s plan to compete and coach did not show how these activities would impact the field of freestyle wrestling more broadly.
Supporting Evidence:
The Petitioner submitted letters of support from wrestling athletes and coaches, a resident athlete employment contract, and statements about his wrestling achievements and coaching activities. However, these documents did not sufficiently verify the national importance of his proposed endeavor.
Inconsistencies in Proposed Endeavor:
The Petitioner’s evidence focused on his prior career experience and the importance of wrestling as a sport. However, it did not specifically address how his proposed endeavor would have national importance. The letters of support described the Petitioner’s prior career rather than the prospective endeavor, and the generalized statements about wrestling did not address the specific impact of his proposed activities.
Supporting Documentation
Letters of Intent:
Letters of support were provided, but they did not establish the national importance of the Petitioner’s proposed endeavor.
Business Plan:
Not applicable.
Advisory Letter:
Advisory letters described the Petitioner’s expertise and contributions in freestyle wrestling but did not establish the national importance of his proposed endeavor.
Any Other Supporting Documentation:
The Petitioner provided additional documentation, including employment contracts and professional statements, but they did not establish a significant record of success or recognition in the proposed endeavor.
Conclusion
The appeal was dismissed because the Petitioner did not establish that his proposed endeavor has national importance, as required by the first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework. While the Petitioner’s proposed endeavor in freestyle wrestling has substantial merit, he did not demonstrate that it has national importance. Consequently, the Petitioner did not qualify for a national interest waiver.
