Date of Decision: September 23, 2022
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-2 National Interest Waiver (NIW)
Field of Expertise: Public Relations and Fundraising Management
Petitioner Information
Profession: Public Relations Manager
Field: Public Relations and Fundraising Management
Nationality: Not Specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Advanced Degree: The Petitioner qualifies as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree.
Criteria Not Met:
Substantial Merit and National Importance: The Petitioner did not sufficiently demonstrate that her proposed endeavor met this criterion.
Well Positioned to Advance the Proposed Endeavor: The Petitioner did not establish that she is well positioned to advance her proposed endeavor.
Key Points from the Decision
Proposed Endeavor:
The Petitioner aims to continue her career in the United States in the field of public relations and fundraising management. Her proposed endeavor includes assisting U.S. companies with communication strategies to enhance business growth, improve employee relations, manage public exposure of executives, and handle sensitive issues affecting corporate image. Additionally, she plans to facilitate cross-border business development and projects between the U.S., Latin America, and Spanish and Portuguese-speaking countries.
Substantial Merit and National Importance:
While the Petitioner’s proposed endeavor has potential merit, the evidence provided was insufficient to demonstrate that the endeavor has substantial merit and national importance. The documentation showed that the Petitioner’s work as a public relations manager has substantial merit, but it did not adequately show that the proposed endeavor would impact her field or the U.S. economy at a national level. The Petitioner’s statements focused on the general importance of public relations but did not provide specific evidence of how her work would have a significant impact on the U.S. economy or public welfare.
Supporting Evidence:
The Petitioner submitted various documents, including letters of support, articles discussing the importance of public relations and marketing skills, and information about the job outlook for public relations managers. However, the letters of support mainly discussed the Petitioner’s skills and experience rather than the national importance of her proposed work. The documentation did not demonstrate that the Petitioner’s work would have a broader impact beyond her company, employers, and clientele.
Inconsistencies in Proposed Endeavor:
The Petitioner did not provide sufficient information and evidence to demonstrate the broader implications of her proposed endeavor. The statements regarding her intention to assist U.S. businesses with public relations and fundraising did not show significant potential to employ U.S. workers or offer substantial positive economic effects for the nation.
Supporting Documentation
Letters of Intent:
None specified.
Business Plan:
Not applicable.
Advisory Letter:
Advisory letters described the Petitioner’s expertise but did not establish the national importance of her proposed endeavor.
Any Other Supporting Documentation:
The Petitioner provided additional documentation, including articles and job outlook information, but these did not resolve the inconsistencies in her proposed endeavor or establish the required level of national importance.
Conclusion
The appeal was dismissed because the Petitioner did not establish that her proposed endeavor has national importance, as required by the first prong of the Dhanasar analytical framework. Consequently, the Petitioner did not qualify for a national interest waiver.
