Date of Decision: April 26, 2018
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-2 National Interest Waiver (NIW)
Field of Expertise: Project Management
Petitioner Information
Profession: Project Manager
Field: Roofing
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Approved, then Revoked
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
None explicitly stated.
Criteria Not Met:
The Petitioner did not establish that the Beneficiary possessed the required five years of post-baccalaureate experience as a project manager by the priority date.
The Petitioner did not establish its continuing ability to pay the proffered wage from the priority date onward.
Key Points from the Decision
Proposed Endeavor:
The Petitioner sought to employ the Beneficiary as a project manager, responsible for managing roofing projects and integrating technical activities in architectural or engineering projects.
Substantial Merit and National Importance:
The findings focused on the Petitioner’s financial ability to pay the proffered wage and the Beneficiary’s qualifications for the position rather than the substantial merit and national importance of the proposed endeavor.
On balance, it would be beneficial to the United States to waive the requirements of the Labor Certification process
The Director concluded that the Petitioner did not meet the necessary evidentiary criteria to support the Beneficiary’s qualifications and the validity of the labor certification for the requested classification. This was a key factor in the decision to deny the appeal.
Supporting Evidence:
The Petitioner provided letters from previous employers, tax returns, and an accountant’s report to support the Beneficiary’s qualifications and the company’s financial ability to pay the proffered wage.
Inconsistencies in Proposed Endeavor:
The primary inconsistency was the Beneficiary’s qualifications for the project manager position, specifically the discrepancies in the employment letters and tax returns.
Supporting Documentation
Letters of Intent: Not applicable in this case.
Business Plan: Not applicable in this case.
Advisory Letter: Not applicable in this case.
Any Other Supporting Documentation: Not applicable in this case.
Conclusion
The appeal was dismissed. The Petitioner did not establish that the Beneficiary possessed the required experience by the priority date and did not demonstrate its continuing ability to pay the proffered wage from the priority date onward.
