Date of Decision: March 16, 2023
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-2 National Interest Waiver (NIW)
Field of Expertise: Law and Environmental Sustainability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Professor
Field: Law and Environmental Sustainability
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Remanded
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Criterion 1: Official academic record showing that the petitioner has a degree, diploma, certificate, or similar award from a college, university, school, or other institution of learning relating to the area of exceptional ability.
Criterion 2: Evidence of registration as a lawyer in Brazil, which requires admission to the bar and other qualifications.
Criteria Not Met:
Criterion 1: Evidence of recognition for achievements and significant contributions to the industry or field by peers, governmental entities, or professional or business organizations. The provided letters and certificates did not demonstrate recognition beyond the local community.
Criterion 2: Evidence of at least ten years of full-time experience in the occupation. The employment letters and other documents did not clearly establish ten years of full-time experience or its relevance to the occupation of a law professor.
Key Points from the Decision
Proposed Endeavor:
The petitioner initially proposed to teach and guide future legal practitioners as a law and environmental sustainability professor. On appeal, the petitioner expanded the endeavor to include creating a school program for education in human rights and international law, engaging in fundraising, training people, promoting peace, justice, and human rights, and advising organizations.
Substantial Merit and National Importance:
The petitioner’s proposed endeavor has both substantial merit and national importance, particularly in education and human rights. However, the expanded activities on appeal necessitate a reevaluation of the consistency and relevance to the original petition.
Supporting Evidence:
The petitioner provided various documents, including a Validential foreign academic equivalency evaluation, academic records, letters of recommendation, certificates of recognition, evidence of conference participation, and articles authored on relevant topics. However, the evidence did not consistently support the claims of exceptional ability or the substantial impact of the proposed endeavor.
Inconsistencies in Proposed Endeavor:
The petitioner initially proposed to work as a law professor but later added activities related to creating educational programs, fundraising, and advising organizations. This change requires a thorough review to ensure it aligns with the initial petition.
Supporting Documentation
Letters of Intent: Provided but did not adequately demonstrate recognition for significant contributions to the field.
Business Plan: Not explicitly mentioned in the review.
Advisory Letter: Provided additional context but lacked detailed impact analysis.
Any other supporting documentation: Included academic records, certificates, and articles but did not sufficiently demonstrate the petitioner’s exceptional ability or the national importance of the proposed endeavor.
Conclusion
Final Determination:
The case has been remanded for further review and consideration. The Director’s decision was withdrawn, and the case will be re-evaluated based on the additional evidence and the expanded proposed endeavor.
Reasoning: The evidence provided on appeal suggests the petitioner may qualify for the EB-2 classification, and the expanded activities require further analysis to determine their impact and alignment with the national interest waiver criteria.
Download the Full Petition Review Here
In Re: 25672854
MAR162023_04B5203
