Date of Decision: August 10, 2021
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-2 National Interest Waiver (NIW)
Field of Expertise: Gastroenterology
Petitioner Information
Profession: Gastroenterologist
Field: Gastroenterology
Nationality: Not Specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Dismissed
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
- Advanced Degree Qualification: The petitioner qualifies as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree.
Criteria Not Met:
- National Importance: The petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate that waiving the job offer requirement would be in the national interest.
- Well-Positioned to Advance the Proposed Endeavor: The petitioner did not sufficiently demonstrate his ability to advance his proposed endeavor in gastroenterology.
Key Points from the Decision
Proposed Endeavor:
The petitioner, a gastroenterologist, proposed to continue his research and clinical practice in the United States, focusing on disease prevention and improving the quality of healthcare for patients with gastrointestinal disorders. His research includes developing methods for the early detection and treatment of gastrointestinal diseases.
Substantial Merit and National Importance:
The petitioner’s proposed endeavor in gastroenterology has substantial merit. However, the Director concluded that the petitioner did not demonstrate its national importance. The evidence provided did not show that his work would significantly impact the broader U.S. healthcare system or the field of gastroenterology at a national level.
On balance, it would be beneficial to the United States to waive the requirements of the Labor Certification process:
The petitioner argued that his work would contribute to public health and improve healthcare outcomes for patients with gastrointestinal disorders. However, the Director found insufficient evidence to support these claims. The proposed work did not show substantial potential to employ U.S. workers or provide notable health benefits that would justify waiving the labor certification process.
Supporting Evidence:
The petitioner submitted various documents, including academic records, published research articles, letters of support, and evidence of peer review activity. However, these documents did not sufficiently demonstrate that his specific endeavor would have a significant national impact.
Inconsistencies in Proposed Endeavor:
The petitioner’s statements about the broader impact of his work were not supported by sufficient evidence to demonstrate its national importance. Additionally, there were discrepancies in the petitioner’s documentation of his contributions to the field, particularly regarding the significance of his research and publications.
Supporting Documentation
Letters of Intent:
Not applicable.
Business Plan:
Not provided or summarized in the decision.
Advisory Letter:
Letters from colleagues and industry professionals supported the petitioner’s skills but did not provide specific examples of his impact on the industry.
Any Other Supporting Documentation:
The petitioner provided letters from clients and an expert opinion letter, but these did not adequately demonstrate recognition for significant contributions to the field.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed.
Reasoning: The petitioner did not meet the criteria for demonstrating the national importance of his proposed endeavor and did not provide sufficient justification for waiving the labor certification process. The proposed work was deemed to have a limited impact beyond his direct research and clinical activities.
Download the Full Petition Review Here
