Date of Decision: September 21, 2021
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-2 National Interest Waiver (NIW)
Field of Expertise: Legal Administration
Petitioner Information
Profession: Legal Administrator
Field: Legal Administration
Nationality: Not Specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Dismissed
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
- None
Criteria Not Met:
- Substantial Merit and National Importance: The petitioner did not demonstrate how his proposed endeavor would result in significant advancements or improvements to the field of legal administration or law, nor did he show that his work would have substantial merit or national importance.
- Well-Positioned to Advance the Proposed Endeavor: The petitioner failed to provide sufficient evidence showing he is well-positioned to advance his proposed endeavor. Despite submitting academic credentials and a brief personal statement, he did not convincingly demonstrate his capacity to significantly influence the legal administration field.
- Beneficial to the United States to Waive the Requirements of the Labor Certification Process: The petitioner did not show that waiving the labor certification requirement would be beneficial to the United States. The evidence provided did not adequately demonstrate that his contributions would justify such a waiver.
Key Points from the Decision
Proposed Endeavor:
The petitioner intended to work as a legal administrator, assisting attorneys with tasks such as client interviews, legal research, drafting correspondence, preparing and assembling documents for court submission, and gathering evidence for briefs.
Substantial Merit and National Importance:
The petitioner’s proposed endeavor was not shown to have substantial merit or national importance. The petitioner’s assertions about improving legal education and enhancing U.S. business by promoting cross-border transactions were not supported by concrete evidence.
On balance, it would be beneficial to the United States to waive the requirements of the Labor Certification process:
The petitioner argued that his work would contribute to the United States by enhancing the legal field and fostering international business activities. However, he did not provide sufficient evidence to support the claim that his contributions would justify waiving the labor certification process.
Supporting Evidence:
The petitioner submitted his curriculum vitae, academic credentials, and a brief personal statement. These documents did not adequately demonstrate his ability to significantly impact the field of legal administration.
Inconsistencies in Proposed Endeavor:
The petitioner’s assertions about his potential 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 legal administration.
Supporting Documentation
Letters of Intent:
Not applicable.
Business Plan:
Not provided or summarized in the decision.
Advisory Letter:
Not provided or summarized in the decision.
Any Other Supporting Documentation:
Included brief personal statements, which did not adequately demonstrate 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 well-positioned to advance his proposed endeavor or that waiving the labor certification requirement would benefit the United States. The evidence provided was insufficient to support his claims of substantial impact and national importance.
Download the Full Petition Review Here
