Date of Decision: AUG. 2, 2022
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-2 National Interest Waiver (NIW)
Field of Expertise: Supply Chain Management
Petitioner Information
Profession: Supply Chain Manager
Field: Supply Chain Management
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Criterion 1: Not applicable
Criterion 2: Not applicable
Criteria Not Met:
Criterion 1: Substantial merit and national importance not demonstrated due to insufficient and inconsistent evidence regarding the proposed endeavor.
Criterion 2: National importance not established, as the proposed work does not sufficiently impact the U.S. economy or field of expertise at a national level.
Key Points from the Decision
Proposed Endeavor:
The Petitioner intended to continue using her expertise in freight forwarding and supply chain management to provide expert advice and guidance to U.S. companies, aiming to optimize supply chains, reduce costs, and create jobs. However, her proposed endeavor lacked specific details and clarity, especially after her revised plan indicated a shift towards managing a cosmetic products import and manufacturing company.
Substantial Merit and National Importance:
The Petitioner did not adequately demonstrate that her work in supply chain management or her new business venture would have national importance. The initial plan lacked specificity, and the revised plan changed the nature of the proposed endeavor without sufficient evidence of national significance.
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 show that waiving the job offer requirement would benefit the United States. Her claims of economic and environmental benefits were broad and lacked specific supporting evidence.
Supporting Evidence:
The Petitioner provided general statements about her expertise and potential benefits but failed to provide detailed and relevant evidence to support her claims. The business plan for her new company focused on cosmetic products without sufficient links to her initial supply chain management claims.
Inconsistencies in Proposed Endeavor:
The Petitioner’s initial claim focused on providing supply chain management services, while the revised plan centered on managing a cosmetic products company. These inconsistent statements undermined the credibility of her proposed endeavor.
Supporting Documentation
Letters of Intent:
Not applicable.
Business Plan:
The business plan provided details on market segmentation and competitors for cosmetic products but did not address supply chain management services or logistics consulting.
Advisory Letter:
Not applicable.
Any Other Supporting Documentation:
Not applicable.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed.
Reasoning: The Petitioner did not demonstrate the national importance of her proposed endeavor, and the revised plan was inconsistent with the initial filing. The evidence provided was insufficient to establish eligibility for a national interest waiver.
Download the Full Petition Review Here
