Date of Decision: May 25, 2023
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-2 National Interest Waiver (NIW)
Field of Expertise: Human Resources
Petitioner Information
Profession: Human Resources Professional
Field: Human Resources
Nationality: Not Specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
None: The petitioner failed to meet the necessary criteria for classification as an advanced degree professional or as an individual of exceptional ability.
Criteria Not Met:
Advanced Degree Requirement: The petitioner’s educational credentials did not meet the requirement for an advanced degree as her foreign education was equivalent to less than a U.S. bachelor’s degree.
National Interest Waiver: The petitioner did not demonstrate that her proposed endeavor had substantial merit and national importance sufficient to warrant a waiver of the job offer requirement.
Key Points from the Decision
Proposed Endeavor:
The petitioner proposed to continue her career in human resources, aiming to address key challenges within the field and contribute to organizational effectiveness.
Substantial Merit and National Importance:
The Director concluded that while the field of human resources is important, the petitioner did not sufficiently demonstrate how her specific endeavors would have substantial merit or address national shortages in a manner that impacts national interests.
Supporting Evidence:
The petitioner submitted letters and evaluations regarding her qualifications and the relevance of her work to the field of human resources.
Documentation included discussions on the strategic value of her roles and potential contributions to industry best practices.
Inconsistencies in Proposed Endeavor:
The appeal noted that the original decision lacked a detailed explanation of the reasons for denying the national interest waiver, particularly regarding how the petitioner’s endeavors would align with national importance.
Supporting Documentation
Letters of Intent:
There was no mention of specific letters of intent that would demonstrate significant commitment from prospective employers or indicate a direct impact on national interests.
Business Plan:
The materials submitted did not include a comprehensive business plan that outlined the strategic impact of the petitioner’s work on the national level.
Advisory Letter:
Although advisory letters supported the petitioner’s qualifications, they did not convincingly argue the national importance of her proposed activities.
Conclusion
The final determination to dismiss the appeal was based on the petitioner’s failure to prove her qualifications as an advanced degree professional and her inability to demonstrate that her work in human resources would significantly benefit the U.S. on a national level. The decision highlighted the need for clear, substantial evidence of national impact beyond personal qualifications and direct job functions.
