The Petitioner, who intends to operate a freight company, seeks classification as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree. See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 203(b)(2), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(2). The Petitioner also seeks a national interest waiver ofthe job offer requirement that is attached to this EB-2 immigrant classification. See section 203(b )(2)(B)(i) of the Act. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) may grant this discretionary waiver of the required job offer, and thus of a labor certification, when it is in the national interest to do so. The Director of the Nebraska Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the record did not establish that the Petitioner qualifies for the national interest waiver. The matter is now before us on appeal under 8 C.F.R. § 103 .3.
The Petitioner bears the burden ofproof to demonstrate eligibility by a preponderance ofthe evidence. Matter ofChawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369, 375-76 (AAO 2010). We review the questions in this matter de nova. Matter of Christo 's, Inc., 26 I&N Dec. 537, 537 n.2 (AAO 2015). Upon de nova review, we will dismiss the appeal.
Law
To qualify for a national interest waiver, a petitioner must first show eligibility for the underlying EB-2 visa classification, as either an advanced degree professional or an individual of exceptional ability in the sciences, arts, or business. Section 203(b)(2)(B)(i) of the Act.
Once a petitioner demonstrates EB-2 eligibility, they must then establish that they merit a discretionary waiver of the job offer requirement "in the national interest." Section 203(b )(2)(B)(i) of the Act. While neither the statute nor the pertinent regulations define the term "national interest," Matter of Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. 884, 889 (AAO 2016), provides the framework for adjudicating national interest waiver petitions. Dhanasar states that USCIS may, as matter of discretion, 1 grant a national interest waiver if the petitioner demonstrates that:
- The proposed endeavor has both substantial merit and national importance;
- The individual is well positioned to advance their proposed endeavor; and
- On balance, waiving the job offer requirement would benefit the United States.
Analysis
The Director concluded that the Petitioner qualifies as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree. 2 The issue before us is whether the Petitioner has established that a waiver of the requirement ofa job offer, and thus a labor certification, would be in the national interest. The Director determined that the Petitioner had not satisfied any prongs of the Dhanasar national interest test. Materials filed with the petition indicate that, in her native Russia, the Petitioner studied economics and finance before working at various banks from 2010 to 2020. The Petitioner specified that she had been unemployed since April 2020.3 The Petitioner has been in the United States since August 2021, when she entered the United States as a B-2 nonimmigrant visitor.
The first Dhanasar prong, substantial merit and national importance, focuses on the specific endeavor that the individual proposes to undertake. The endeavor's merit may be demonstrated in a range of areas such as business, entrepreneurialism, science, technology, culture, health, or education. In determining whether the proposed endeavor has national importance, we consider its potential prospective impact. Matter o/Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. at 889. We look for broader implications. An endeavor that has significant potential to employ U.S. workers or has other substantial positive economic effects, particularly in an economically depressed area, for instance, may well be understood to have national importance. Id. at 889-890.
The Petitioner's introductory statement includes a section under the heading "My Proposed Endeavor Has Both Substantial Merit and National Importance." That section reads, in its entirety:
I seek employment as an independent owner of the freight business, serving customers and customers [sic] throughout the United States.
This industry is important for the US because there is a huge demand for the transportation ofgoods ofvarying degrees ofimportance and volume. I will be able to develop effective approaches to the management of transport logistics business processes, which will enable processes to be established through optimization ofwork tasks and resources, through a balance of speed, quality, flexibility, and management based on indicators that reflect the costs of the process, execution time and resource utilization, thus facilitating the analysis and optimization ofthe logistics process based on real values of indicators.
The Petitioner did not provide any further details or supporting evidence to show how her proposed endeavor would have a wider impact on logistics management or the trucking industry.
In a request for evidence, the Director stated that the Petitioner's "vague" and "cursory description" did not establish the substantial merit and national importance of the Petitioner's proposed endeavor. The Director requested "[a] detailed description of the proposed endeavor" supported by "[d]ocumentary evidence."
In response, the Petitioner submitted a business plan for a limited liability company that the Petitioner established inl 12022, nearly a year after she filed the petition in December 2021. The business plan provides general information about the trucking industry and indicates that "the Petitioner will devise effective business strategies designed to reduce expenses and increase its in-house Truck Drivers' pay to above currentmarket averages, which will ensure that more capital is injected into the national economy." The business plan states that the Petitioner's company "primarily targets manufacturers" and "freight brokers," while also providing "car transport service." In terms of the volume of business the Petitioner's company will conduct, the business plan states: "The Company already has one truck (Ram 3500), and [the Petitioner] plans to purchase nine additional trucks."4 In an advisory letter, an associate professor atl Idetailed the claimed benefits arising from the Petitioner's proposed endeavor, stating, for example: "Cargo transport services provided by [the Petitioner's company] include the transportation ofoversized cargo such as equipment and largescale metal constructions. The company provides safe, secure, and competitive logistics for all types ofoversized freight." The Petitioner submitted no documenta1y evidence to conoborate these presenttense descriptions of the claimed services.
The Director denied the petition, stating: "the business plan indicates the company was formed on 2022, well after the initial date of filing and does not indicate how the proposed endeavor has substantial merit." On appeal, the Petitioner states: "the date ofthe company's registration should not be used as a disqualifying factor."
The registration date is relevant because a petitioner must meet all eligibility requirements as of the priority date, which in this case is the petition's filing date. See 8 C.F.R. §§ 103.2(b)(l) and 204.S(d). Developments after the filing date, such as the formation of the company and specific information about its management and operation, cannot establish eligibility as of the filing date.
The Petitioner's response to the request for evidence did not elaborate on the Petitioner's initial claim that she "will be able to develop effective approaches to the management oftransport logistics business processes." Instead, the advisory letter and business plan emphasized the claimed benefits, such as tax revenue and job creation, that would arise from the operation of the Petitioner's own company. In terms of national scope, the Director concluded that the Petitioner had not established that the proposed endeavor would have a significant impact beyond benefit to the company and its customers. The record contains statistics about the trucking industry as a whole, but these figures do not establish the economic or other impact of the Petitioner's specific proposed endeavor.
On appeal, the Petitioner asserts that she "is planning to establish a trucking business that has the potential to employ the U.S. workers and impact the economy of the United States." The Petitioner also repeats the assertion that she "submitted an extensive business plan ... and, therefore, the date of the company's registration should not be used as a disqualifying factor." The Director did not cite the company's registration date when discussing the national importance of the proposed endeavor. Rather, the Director cited the lack of evidence that the proposed endeavor would have a wider impact beyond benefit to the company itself and the customers who would use its services. The Petitioner's statement on appeal does not address, rebut, or overcome this determination.
The Petitioner's business plan projects employment of 16 drivers and total sales exceeding $8.6 million at the end of five years, but the Petitioner did not establish the broader implications and significance of these projections in an industry that, according to the Petitioner's cited statistics, employs over 1.4 million people with annual revenues exceeding $260 billion.No broader implications shown
We agree with the Director that the Petitioner's evidence does not meet the burden ofproofto establish the substantial merit and national importance of the proposed endeavor. Detailed discussion of the remaining prongs of the Dhanasar national interest test cannot change the outcome of this appeal. Therefore, we reserve argument on the second and third prongs. 5
Conclusion
The Petitioner has not established the substantial merit and national imp01iance of the proposed endeavor. Therefore, the Petitioner has not shown eligibility for the national interest waiver, and we will dismiss the appeal as a matter of discretion.
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.