Date of Decision: July 26, 2022
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-2 National Interest Waiver (NIW)
Field of Expertise: Medical Administration
Petitioner Information
Profession: Medical Administrator
Field: Dental Health Administration
Nationality:
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met
- Substantial Merit and National Importance: The Director acknowledged that the proposed endeavor of the Petitioner, which involved working as a medical administrator/dental surgeon, had substantial merit and national importance due to the focus on improving dental health care.
Criteria Not Met
- Well Positioned to Advance the Proposed Endeavor: The evidence did not establish that the Petitioner is well positioned to advance her proposed endeavor. The Director noted insufficient details on how her business practices and innovative techniques in dental administration would be uniquely beneficial in the United States.
Key Points from the Decision
Proposed Endeavor
The Petitioner planned to continue her career as a business administrator in the dental health field, intending to open a polyclinic based on her experiences in Brazil. This clinic aimed to provide comprehensive medical care under one management function, offering highly specialized yet affordable services.
Substantial Merit and National Importance
The Director agreed that the proposed endeavor had substantial merit and national importance, recognizing the importance of accessible dental care and the Petitioner’s efforts to improve healthcare accessibility and quality.
On balance, it would be beneficial to the United States to waive the requirements of the Labor Certification process
The Petitioner did not sufficiently demonstrate how her proposed endeavor would have a broader national impact, nor did she provide detailed information on how her clinics would operate differently or more effectively than existing U.S. clinics. The Director found that the economic and healthcare benefits claimed by the Petitioner were not substantiated with concrete evidence.
Supporting Evidence
The Petitioner submitted various pieces of evidence, including a professional plan, reference letters, and articles on dental care importance. However, these documents lacked specific details about how her proposed clinics would provide unique benefits to the U.S. healthcare system.
Inconsistencies in Proposed Endeavor
The Petitioner did not address how she would manage her clinics in the U.S. healthcare system, which operates under different conditions than Brazil. There were also no details on the financial sustainability of her clinics or specific plans to employ U.S. workers.
Supporting Documentation
Letters of Intent
Various reference letters were submitted, praising the Petitioner’s achievements and qualifications. However, most letters did not discuss the proposed endeavor in depth or provide substantial evidence of its national importance.
Business Plan
The Petitioner provided a professional plan but did not detail how the proposed clinics would uniquely benefit the U.S. healthcare system or differ from existing models.
Advisory Letter
Not applicable.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed. The Petitioner did not establish that her proposed endeavor had national importance or that she was well positioned to advance it.
Reasoning: The evidence provided was insufficient to demonstrate that the proposed endeavor would have a substantial positive impact on the U.S. healthcare system or economy. The Petitioner failed to provide concrete examples of how her clinics would operate uniquely or better than existing U.S. clinics.
Download the Full Petition Review Here
