Date of Decision: January 26, 2024
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-2 National Interest Waiver (NIW)
Field of Expertise: Graphic Design
Petitioner Information
Profession: Graphic Designer
Field: Graphic Interior Design
Nationality:
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
- Substantial Merit: The evidence shows the petitioner’s endeavor in graphic design meets the substantial merit of the first Dhanasar prong.
- Expert Opinion: An opinion letter from Dr. V-L- discussed the importance of graphic designers and the broader economic implications, though it lacked specific national importance.
Criteria Not Met:
- National Importance: The petitioner failed to demonstrate that his graphic design services have national importance. The endeavor did not show significant potential to impact the U.S. economy or employ U.S. workers at a substantial level.
- Economic Impact: Projected job creation and revenue from the petitioner’s business plan were not adequately supported with details to demonstrate national significance.
Key Points from the Decision
Proposed Endeavor:
The petitioner plans to offer graphic interior design services, focusing on both commercial and residential spaces in an undisclosed area of Florida.
Substantial Merit and National Importance:
While the petitioner’s services in graphic design were recognized for their merit, they failed to demonstrate national importance, as they lacked broader economic or societal impact.
Supporting Evidence:
The business plan and expert opinion letter provided were deemed insufficient in proving the national importance of the endeavor. The economic forecasts and job creation potential were not convincingly supported by tangible details.
Inconsistencies in Proposed Endeavor:
Discrepancies were noted in the business plan regarding the realistic achievement of projected economic benefits and job creation.
Supporting Documentation
Business Plan:
Reviewed but criticized for lack of detailed justification for revenue and employment projections.
Advisory Letter:
Dr. V-L-‘s letter was noted but did not sufficiently connect the petitioner’s specific services to broader national benefits.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The motion to reconsider was dismissed, upholding the initial decision to deny the petition based on insufficient demonstration of national importance and economic impact.
Reasoning:
The appeal failed to overturn the initial decision as it did not rectify the deficiencies regarding the national importance and prospective economic impact of the proposed endeavor.
Download the Full Petition Review Here
