Date of Decision: December 15, 2021
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-2 National Interest Waiver (NIW)
Field of Expertise: Industrial Design
Petitioner Information
Profession: Industrial Designer
Field: Industrial Design
Nationality: Not Specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Dismissed
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
- None: The petitioner did not meet any of the criteria required to establish exceptional ability.
Criteria Not Met:
- Advanced Degree Professional: The petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to show that his foreign degree was equivalent to a U.S. bachelor’s degree, nor that he had five years of progressive post-baccalaureate experience.
- Exceptional Ability: The petitioner did not satisfy at least three of the six criteria required to establish exceptional ability.
Key Points from the Decision
Proposed Endeavor:
The petitioner proposed to contribute to the field of industrial design through his work and experience. However, specific details of the proposed endeavor were not adequately documented.
Substantial Merit and National Importance:
The petitioner’s proposed endeavor was not found to have substantial merit and national importance due to insufficient evidence supporting the impact of his work.
On balance, it would be beneficial to the United States to waive the requirements of the Labor Certification process:
The petitioner failed to demonstrate that waiving the labor certification requirement would benefit the United States. The evidence provided did not support the claim that his contributions were significant enough to justify the waiver.
Supporting Evidence:
The petitioner submitted letters of support, a curriculum vitae, and academic credentials. However, these documents did not sufficiently demonstrate his ability to significantly impact his field. The letters from colleagues praised his work but did not provide concrete examples of substantial influence or recognition.
Inconsistencies in Proposed Endeavor:
The petitioner’s claims about his influence and impact were not fully supported by the evidence provided. The documentation did not clearly show that his work had been widely adopted or recognized in the field of industrial design.
Supporting Documentation
Letters of Intent:
Not applicable.
Business Plan:
Not provided or summarized in the decision.
Advisory Letter:
Provided but not sufficiently detailed to support the claim of national importance.
Any Other Supporting Documentation:
Included letters from colleagues and professionals, praising his work but not adequately demonstrating his significant impact in the field.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed.
Reasoning: The petitioner did not meet the criteria for demonstrating that he is an advanced degree professional or an individual of exceptional ability. The evidence provided was insufficient to support his claims of substantial impact and national importance.
