Date of Decision: September 2, 2021
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-2 National Interest Waiver (NIW)
Field of Expertise: Software Engineering
Petitioner Information
Profession: Software Engineer
Field: Software Engineering
Nationality: Not Specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Dismissed
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
- Advanced Degree: The petitioner holds a foreign bachelor’s degree equivalent to a U.S. baccalaureate degree.
Criteria Not Met:
- Eligibility for Advanced Degree Classification: The petitioner did not demonstrate at least five years of progressive post-baccalaureate experience in his specialty at the time he filed the Form I-140.
- National Importance: The Director did not adequately evaluate whether the petitioner’s proposed endeavor has national importance.
- Well Positioned to Advance: The petitioner did not sufficiently demonstrate that he is well positioned to advance his proposed endeavor.
Key Points from the Decision
Proposed Endeavor:
The petitioner proposed to continue his work on computer-aided design and the development of algorithms for interconnected electronic devices. His endeavor includes research in the Internet of Things (IoT) and improving the efficiency of electronic systems.
Substantial Merit and National Importance:
While the petitioner’s work in software engineering has substantial merit, the Director did not provide a comprehensive analysis of whether the endeavor has national importance. The petitioner claimed that his work would benefit the expansion of the global network of interconnected electronic devices, impacting various industries such as healthcare and home design. However, the Director did not adequately address the evidence provided by the petitioner, including letters from his employer and advisory opinion letters, which discussed the potential impact of his work on the IoT market.
Well Positioned to Advance the Proposed Endeavor:
The petitioner provided documentation of his professional experience, academic credentials, published articles, and letters of support. However, the evidence was insufficient to demonstrate that he is well positioned to advance his proposed endeavor. The Director noted that the petitioner did not provide specific examples of how his research had been implemented or utilized in the field. The petitioner’s citation record and peer review activity were acknowledged but did not establish a level of success or progress in the field sufficient to meet the requirements.
On balance, it would be beneficial to the United States to waive the requirements of the Labor Certification process:
The petitioner did not provide adequate justification for waiving the labor certification process. The evidence was insufficient to prove the national interest in the petitioner’s contributions.
Supporting Evidence:
The petitioner submitted various documentation, including descriptions of his professional experience, academic credentials, and letters of support. However, these were not sufficient to demonstrate the national importance of his proposed endeavor or that he is well positioned to advance it.
Inconsistencies in Proposed Endeavor:
The petitioner’s evidence did not sufficiently demonstrate the potential broader impact of his proposed endeavor. The Director’s analysis did not fully address the evidentiary deficiencies and the lack of a comprehensive evaluation of the proposed endeavor’s national importance.
Supporting Documentation
Letters of Intent: Not provided
Business Plan: Not provided or summarized in the decision
Advisory Letter: Provided but not sufficiently detailed to support the claim of national importance
Other Supporting Documentation: Included descriptions of professional experience, academic credentials, and letters of support, which were insufficient to establish the broader national importance of the petitioner’s proposed endeavor.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed.
Reasoning: The petitioner did not establish that his proposed endeavor has national importance or that it would be beneficial to waive the labor certification process. The petitioner did not demonstrate eligibility for or merit a national interest waiver as a matter of discretion.
Download the Full Petition Review Here
