Date of Decision: December 9, 2021
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-2 National Interest Waiver (NIW)
Field of Expertise: Legal Consulting
Petitioner Information
Profession: International Legal Consultant
Field: Legal Consulting
Nationality: Not Specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Approved
Appeal Outcome: Remanded
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
- Substantial Merit and National Importance: The petitioner demonstrated that her proposed endeavor in international legal consulting has substantial merit and national importance. Her work was acknowledged to have significant implications for the field of law and international relations.
Criteria Not Met:
- Well-Positioned to Advance the Proposed Endeavor: The petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to show she was well-positioned to advance her proposed endeavor. The documentation submitted did not convincingly demonstrate her capacity to influence or advance the field of legal consulting significantly.
- Beneficial to the United States to Waive the Requirements of the Labor Certification Process: The petitioner failed to show that, on balance, waiving the labor certification requirement would be beneficial to the United States. The evidence provided did not sufficiently demonstrate the national interest in her contributions.
Key Points from the Decision
Proposed Endeavor:
The petitioner proposed to continue her work as an international legal consultant, contributing to the field through her expertise and consultations.
Substantial Merit and National Importance:
The petitioner’s proposed endeavor was recognized for its substantial merit and national importance due to its potential to address critical issues in international law and relations. Her work has broader implications for the field, as it is disseminated through her consulting services.
On balance, it would be beneficial to the United States to waive the requirements of the Labor Certification process:
The petitioner argued that her work would contribute to the United States by enhancing the body of knowledge in legal consulting. However, she did not provide sufficient evidence to support the claim that her contributions would justify waiving the labor certification process.
Supporting Evidence:
The petitioner submitted her curriculum vitae, academic credentials, published articles, and letters of support. However, these documents did not adequately demonstrate her ability to significantly impact her field. The letters from colleagues and professionals praised her work but did not provide concrete examples of her work being implemented or having a substantial influence.
Inconsistencies in Proposed Endeavor:
The petitioner’s assertions about her influence and impact were not fully supported by the evidence provided. The documentation did not clearly show that her work had been widely adopted or recognized in the field of legal consulting.
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, which praised her work but did not adequately demonstrate her significant impact in the field.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was remanded.
Reasoning: The petitioner did not meet the criteria for demonstrating that she is well-positioned to advance her proposed endeavor or that waiving the labor certification requirement would benefit the United States. The evidence provided was insufficient to support her claims of substantial impact and national importance.
Download the Full Petition Review Here
