Date of Decision: July 30, 2019
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-2 National Interest Waiver (NIW)
Field of Expertise: Information Technology Consulting Services
Petitioner Information
Profession: Programmer Analyst
Field: Information Technology Consulting Services
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Remanded
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
The Petitioner demonstrated net current assets exceeding the annual proffered wage of $135,283.
The Petitioner provided a 2018 federal income tax return showing net current assets sufficient to pay the Beneficiary’s proffered wage.
Criteria Not Met:
The Petitioner failed to demonstrate the ability to pay the combined proffered wages of all petitions filed.
The discrepancy in the Beneficiary’s Social Security numbers between Form I-140 and the W-2 form was not adequately explained.
Key Points from the Decision
Proposed Endeavor:
The Petitioner, JSMC Inc., sought to employ the Beneficiary as a programmer analyst with a proffered wage of $135,283 annually. The job involved providing advanced information technology consulting services.
Substantial Merit and National Importance:
While the decision did not specifically address the substantial merit and national importance of the proposed endeavor, it implicitly recognized the critical role of a programmer analyst in the information technology consulting sector.
Supporting Evidence:
IRS Form W-2: The Petitioner provided a W-2 form indicating a payment of $71,875 to the Beneficiary in 2018. However, the W-2 form had a different Social Security number than the one listed on Form I-140, casting doubt on its authenticity.
Federal Income Tax Return: The Petitioner submitted its 2018 tax return, which showed a negative net income but net current assets of $309,120, sufficient to cover the proffered wage of the Beneficiary.
Inconsistencies in Proposed Endeavor:
The primary inconsistency was related to the Beneficiary’s Social Security numbers on different documents. Additionally, the Petitioner did not initially provide the proffered wages and priority dates for all its filed petitions, which is crucial for determining the ability to pay all wages.
Supporting Documentation
Letters of Intent: Not applicable
Business Plan: Not applicable
Advisory Letter: Not applicable
Any other supporting documentation:
Corporate Certificates: Provided but did not resolve the discrepancy in the Beneficiary’s Social Security numbers.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was remanded.
Reasoning:
The appeal was remanded due to the Petitioner’s failure to provide sufficient information about the combined proffered wages for all its filed petitions and the discrepancy in the Beneficiary’s Social Security numbers. The Director of the Texas Service Center will seek additional evidence to resolve these issues. The Petitioner needs to provide the proffered wages and priority dates for all its petitions and explain the inconsistency in the Beneficiary’s Social Security numbers to demonstrate its ability to pay all proffered wages and ensure compliance with USCIS regulations.
