Date of Decision: November 15, 2023
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-2 National Interest Waiver (NIW)
Field of Expertise: Mechanical Engineering
Petitioner Information
Profession: Mechanical Engineer
Field: Mechanical Engineering
Nationality: Not Specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Withdrawn and Remanded for Further Consideration
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
- Advanced Degree: The Petitioner qualified as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree, with a bachelor’s degree in mechanical engineering and over five years of progressive experience in the field.
Criteria Not Met:
- National Importance: The Petitioner did not conclusively establish that his proposed endeavor—working as a mechanical engineer specializing in brake systems—has national importance. The evidence provided did not sufficiently demonstrate that the Petitioner’s work would have a significant impact beyond his immediate employment and clients to benefit the U.S. economy or the mechanical engineering field on a national scale.
Key Points from the Decision
Proposed Endeavor:
The Petitioner proposed to work in the United States as a mechanical engineer specializing in brake systems. His focus was on developing innovative automotive technology, enhancing the safety and efficiency of vehicle brake systems, and adapting car models to meet international safety and emissions regulations. The Petitioner argued that his work would help U.S. organizations expand their revenues and contribute to the U.S. economy.
Substantial Merit and National Importance:
The appeal was withdrawn and remanded because the initial decision by the Director did not sufficiently explain the basis for the conclusion that the Petitioner’s endeavor lacked national importance. The Petitioner provided a professional plan, letters of recommendation, and industry reports, which the Director acknowledged as demonstrating substantial merit. However, the determination of national importance was insufficiently supported by detailed analysis. The Petitioner did not provide adequate evidence of the broader implications of his work on the U.S. economy or the mechanical engineering field.
The Director’s decision was deemed inadequate for review because it failed to fully explain the reasons for the denial, thereby preventing meaningful appellate review. The case was remanded for the Director to re-evaluate the evidence and issue a new decision that clearly addresses the national importance of the Petitioner’s proposed endeavor.
On balance, it would be beneficial to the United States to waive the requirements of the Labor Certification process:
This prong was not fully analyzed due to the remand for further consideration.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The Director’s decision was withdrawn, and the matter was remanded for further consideration. The Director is required to re-evaluate the evidence provided and issue a new decision that thoroughly explains the national importance of the Petitioner’s proposed endeavor.
Download the Full Petition Review Here
