Date of Decision: January 11, 2024
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-2 National Interest Waiver (NIW)
Field of Expertise: Structural and Hydraulic Engineering
Petitioner Information
- Profession: Structural and Hydraulic Engineer
- Field: Structural and Hydraulic Design and Consulting
- Nationality: Venezuelan
Summary of Decision
- Initial Decision: Denied
- Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
- Criteria Met:
- Criterion 1: Demonstrated substantial merit of the proposed endeavor through the scope of the activities and their alignment with U.S. initiatives.
- Criteria Not Met:
- Criterion 1: Failed to establish the national importance of the proposed endeavor.
- Criterion 2: Insufficient evidence on the broader economic impact and potential to employ U.S. workers significantly.
Key Points from the Decision
- Proposed Endeavor:
- The petitioner planned to manage a studio offering structural and hydraulic design services, alongside operating a soil and concrete laboratory in Florida, aiming to enhance construction standards and support affordable housing initiatives.
- Substantial Merit and National Importance:
- While the proposed endeavor was recognized for its substantial merit, the AAO concluded it lacked national importance due to its limited prospective impact beyond the petitioner’s immediate clients and locality.
- Supporting Evidence:
- The petitioner provided a “Proposed Endeavor Statement” and responses to evidence requests, which included plans for service expansion and training programs but lacked compelling documentation to establish a significant national impact.
- Inconsistencies in Proposed Endeavor:
- The decision highlighted discrepancies in demonstrating how the proposed services would achieve broader economic benefits or substantial impacts beyond the local community.
Supporting Documentation
- Letters of Intent: (if applicable)
- Not specified in the decision.
- Business Plan: (if applicable)
- Details of the business plan were implied but not elaborately discussed in terms of their contribution to national importance.
- Advisory Letter: (if applicable)
- No specific advisory letters were referenced in the decision.
Conclusion
- Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed as the petitioner failed to adequately demonstrate the national importance of his proposed endeavor, despite the substantial merit of the activities described.
- Reasoning:
- The appeal lacked sufficient evidence of national impact and economic benefits, focusing instead on local or regional effects without broader implications.
