Date of Decision: November 21, 2023
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-2 National Interest Waiver (NIW)
Field of Expertise: Law
Petitioner Information
Profession: Lawyer
Field: Law
Nationality: Not Specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Dismissed
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
- Advanced Degree: The Petitioner was found to qualify as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree.
Criteria Not Met:
- National Importance: The Petitioner did not demonstrate that her proposed endeavor—providing legal services to U.S. companies with interests in the Brazilian market—has national importance. The evidence did not establish that the Petitioner’s work would have a significant impact beyond her immediate clients to benefit the U.S. economy or legal sector on a national scale.
Key Points from the Decision
Proposed Endeavor:
The Petitioner proposed to work as a lawyer specializing in providing legal advice to U.S. companies engaged in cross-border transactions with Brazil. The Petitioner argued that her deep familiarity with Brazilian law and the Brazilian market would benefit U.S. companies navigating these legal complexities.
Substantial Merit and National Importance:
The Director recognized the value of legal services but concluded that merely working in an important field is insufficient to establish the national importance of the proposed endeavor. The Director found that the Petitioner’s work, while beneficial to her immediate clients, did not demonstrate broader implications for the U.S. legal sector or economy. The Petitioner’s claims about her impact on the national economy and job creation were not supported by sufficient evidence.
Final Merits Determination:
The Petitioner did not provide adequate evidence to show that her proposed work would have a significant impact beyond her specific role, clients, or business, thus failing to meet the Dhanasar framework’s first prong. The appeal did not introduce new evidence or arguments sufficient to alter the Director’s initial decision.
On balance, it would be beneficial to the United States to waive the requirements of the Labor Certification process:
This prong was not analyzed further because the Petitioner did not satisfy the first prong regarding national importance.
Supporting Documentation
Professional Plan and Statements:
The Petitioner submitted a professional plan and statements outlining her proposed work and the potential benefits to U.S. companies involved in cross-border transactions with Brazil. However, these documents did not provide specific evidence demonstrating a broader impact on the national level.
Expert Opinion and Recommendation Letters:
The Petitioner included expert opinion letters and recommendation letters that emphasized her qualifications and the potential benefits of her work. However, these letters did not sufficiently demonstrate that the Petitioner’s proposed endeavor would have national importance or broader implications for the U.S. economy or legal sector.
Industry Articles and Reports:
The Petitioner provided articles and reports discussing the importance of legal services, particularly in cross-border transactions. While these documents highlighted the value of legal work, they did not specifically link the Petitioner’s proposed endeavor to national-level impacts.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed because the Petitioner did not establish that her proposed endeavor as a lawyer specializing in cross-border transactions with Brazil would have national importance or broader implications for the U.S. economy or legal sector. The evidence provided was insufficient to demonstrate that waiving the job offer requirement would benefit the United States.
Download the Full Petition Review Here
