Date of Decision: January 22, 2024
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-2 National Interest Waiver (NIW)
Field of Expertise: Oil and Gas Industry
Petitioner Information
Profession: Project Manager
Field: Oil and Gas Industry
Nationality: Brazilian
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Criterion 1: EB-2 Classification: The Petitioner met the EB-2 classification requirements through his advanced degree equivalent and five years of progressive experience in the specialty.
Criterion 2: Substantial Merit: The proposed endeavor in the oil and gas industry was determined to have substantial merit due to its significance to the U.S. economy and job creation.
Criteria Not Met:
Criterion 1: National Importance: The appeal failed to specifically connect the petitioner’s proposed work with national importance, focusing instead on the general importance of the industry.
Criterion 2: Specific Proposed Endeavor: The appeal did not clearly define whether the petitioner intended to work as a consultant or employee, which affected the determination of the endeavor’s impact.
Key Points from the Decision
Proposed Endeavor:
The petitioner proposed to continue working in the oil and gas industry, either as a project manager or consultant, focusing on advancing renewable energy within the industry.
Substantial Merit and National Importance:
The endeavor was recognized for its substantial merit in supporting the U.S. economy. However, the decision noted inconsistencies in the definition and scope of the petitioner’s specific roles, leading to questions about its national importance.
Supporting Evidence:
Evidence included academic evaluations, professional experiences, and industry articles that highlighted the significance of the oil and gas sector. Letters of intent and advisory letters supported his qualifications but were not sufficient to demonstrate the national importance of his specific endeavors.
Inconsistencies in Proposed Endeavor:
There was a lack of clarity whether the petitioner aimed to continue with current employment or seek a new executive role, which led to uncertainties in assessing the specific national benefits of his work.
Supporting Documentation
Letters of Intent: Provided by companies recognizing the petitioner’s consultancy potential.
Business Plan: Not explicitly mentioned but inferred through his career development strategies.
Advisory Letter: Included recommendations from colleagues that attested to his significant industry experience.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The petitioner did not convincingly demonstrate that his work met the criteria for national importance specifically tailored to his proposed endeavors, leading to the dismissal of his appeal.
Reasoning: The appeal lacked specific, clear, and direct evidence of how the petitioner’s individual endeavors would impact the national scale significantly, focusing instead on the broader industry importance.
Download the Full Petition Review Here
