Date of Decision: September 1, 2022
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-2 National Interest Waiver (NIW)
Field of Expertise: Business Administration
Petitioner Information
Profession: General and Operations Professional
Field: Business Administration
Nationality: Not Specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Academic Record: The Petitioner provided a diploma and transcript that meet the criteria for an advanced degree in business administration.
Criteria Not Met:
Commanded Salary: The Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate that his salary or remuneration for services indicates exceptional ability.
Recognition for Achievements: The Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence of recognition for achievements and significant contributions to the industry or field by peers, governmental entities, or professional or business organizations.
Key Points from the Decision
Proposed Endeavor:
The Petitioner aims to establish himself as a general and operations professional, focusing on improving administrative efficiency and business operations. His proposed endeavor includes working in management roles, overseeing business activities, and contributing to the overall growth and success of the businesses he works with.
Substantial Merit and National Importance:
While the proposed endeavor in business administration has potential merit, the evidence provided was insufficient to demonstrate the endeavor’s national importance. The documentation did not adequately show the broader impact of the Petitioner’s role on the U.S. economy or the business administration field.
Supporting Evidence:
The Petitioner submitted a bachelor’s degree in business administration, employment history, and letters from previous employers. However, the evidence did not sufficiently demonstrate that the Petitioner’s salary or remuneration for services indicates exceptional ability. The documentation also lacked substantial evidence of recognition for achievements and significant contributions to the industry.
Inconsistencies in Proposed Endeavor:
There were inconsistencies regarding the Petitioner’s employment history, specifically related to his concurrent roles as a sales director and CEO. The documentation did not clearly resolve how the Petitioner managed both positions simultaneously, raising questions about the accuracy of the evidence provided.
Supporting Documentation
Letters of Intent:
None specified.
Business Plan:
Not applicable.
Advisory Letter:
Advisory letters described the Petitioner’s expertise but did not establish the national importance of his proposed endeavor.
Any Other Supporting Documentation:
The Petitioner provided additional documentation, including academic evaluations and employment letters, but they did not resolve the inconsistencies in his work experience or establish the required level of expertise for exceptional ability classification.
Conclusion
The appeal was dismissed because the Petitioner did not establish that he meets the regulatory requirements for the EB-2 classification as an individual of exceptional ability. The Petitioner failed to demonstrate that his salary or remuneration for services indicates exceptional ability and did not provide sufficient evidence of recognition for achievements and significant contributions to the industry. Consequently, the Petitioner did not qualify for a national interest waiver.
