Date of Decision: August 30, 2018
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-2 National Interest Waiver (NIW)
Field of Expertise: Content Management Software
Petitioner Information
Profession: Senior Technical Consultant
Field: Technical Consulting
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
None: The Petitioner did not meet the necessary criteria to establish its ability to pay the proffered wage or demonstrate the Beneficiary’s qualifications for the offered position.
Criteria Not Met:
Ability to Pay: The Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence of its ability to pay the proffered wage from the petition’s priority date onward.
Beneficiary’s Qualifications: The Petitioner did not establish that the Beneficiary possessed the required three years of experience in the job offered or in “Java-based web application development.”
Key Points from the Decision
Proposed Endeavor:
The Petitioner, a provider of content management software, sought to employ the Beneficiary as a senior technical consultant. The petition was intended to secure lawful permanent resident status for the Beneficiary based on her advanced degree and professional experience.
Substantial Merit and National Importance:
The decision does not specifically address the merit or importance of the proposed endeavor due to the failure to meet other key criteria, such as the ability to pay the proffered wage and the Beneficiary’s qualifications.
On balance, it would be beneficial to the United States to waive the requirements of the Labor Certification process:
The Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to establish the ability to pay the proffered wage, which is essential for waiving the Labor Certification requirements. Additionally, the Petitioner did not establish the Beneficiary’s qualifications for the position.
Supporting Evidence:
The Petitioner submitted copies of online articles reviewing its software products and argued that its strong reputation in the industry indicated its ability to pay the proffered wage. However, this evidence was insufficient to overcome the lack of required financial documentation.
Inconsistencies in Proposed Endeavor:
There were no significant inconsistencies noted in the proposed endeavor. The primary issues were the lack of sufficient evidence to support the Petitioner’s claims regarding the ability to pay the proffered wage and the Beneficiary’s qualifications.
Supporting Documentation
Letters of Intent:
No specific letters of intent were summarized in the decision.
Business Plan:
No specific business plan was summarized in the decision.
Advisory Letter:
No specific advisory letters were summarized in the decision.
Any Other Supporting Documentation:
The Petitioner provided copies of online articles and arguments about its reputation but did not submit required financial documentation to establish the ability to pay the proffered wage.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The motion to reopen and reconsider was denied.
Reasoning: The Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence of its ability to pay the proffered wage or the Beneficiary’s qualifications for the offered position. As a result, the appeal was dismissed, and the motion to reopen and reconsider was denied.
