信息技术讲师 · NIW 国家利益豁免：上诉驳回（2023年3月13日）

案件背景

申请人是一名信息技术（IT）讲师，以专业人士身份申请EB-2（持有高等学位）并请求国家利益豁免职位邀请要求。原审主任认定其符合EB-2高等学位专业人士资格，但未认定其符合Dhanasar框架下的国家利益豁免。

审理经过

1. 初次决定

   德克萨斯服务中心主任以记录未证明申请人符合Dhanasar框架下的国家利益豁免为由拒绝申请。

   核对原文依据

   The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the petition, concluding that the record did not establish the Petitioner's eligibility for a national interest waiver under the Dhanasar framework.

   查看英文原件 · 第 1 页
2. 补件

   主任要求补充证据，指出拟议事业描述“过于笼统和模糊”，要求澄清事业并证明其潜在预期影响。申请人回应强调其雇主已培训并帮助个人获得工作超过二十一年，并提供该组织从JP Morgan Chase、美国心脏协会、微软及哥伦比亚特区就业服务与劳动力投资委员会获得资助的证据。

   核对原文依据

   The Director requested additional evidence to establish the Petitioner's qualifications under the Dhanasar framework, stating that the overall description of the proposed endeavor was "too general and vague."

   查看英文原件 · 第 3 页

   The Petitioner responded by emphasizing that the organization for which he has been employed, I I, has trained and assisted individuals in obtaining jobs for over twenty-one years, and he provided evidence of grants received by the organization from JP Morgan Chase, the American Heart Association, Microsoft, and the District of Columbia's Department of Employment Services & Workforce Investment Council.

   查看英文原件 · 第 3 页
3. 原审拒绝决定

   主任审查全部记录后认定申请人已证明拟议事业满足Dhanasar第一项标准的实质价值部分，但未证明其国家重要性；主任认为事业解释仍模糊，证据未显示拟议事业对IT领域有更广泛影响。

   核对原文依据

   After review of the entirety of the record, the Director determined that the Petitioner has established that the proposed endeavor meets the substantial merit portion of the first prong set forth in the Dhanasar analytical framework. However, the Director determined that the Petitioner has not established the national importance of his proposed endeavor.

   查看英文原件 · 第 3 页
4. 动议

   申请人提出重新开放和复议动议，提交其制作的教学材料和学习工具的文件，以及学生证言和这些学生后来从事IT职位的职位邀请信。主任维持原决定，认为教育材料和资源文件虽似新证据，但证据性质未变；证据显示申请人是其领域内成熟专业人士，但记录未显示所述事业的潜在国家影响。主任拒绝了该后续动议。

   核对原文依据

   On motion, the Petitioner provided documentation of teaching materials and learning tools that he created, as well as testimonials and job offer letters from [ Istudents who went on to employment in IT positions.

   查看英文原件 · 第 3 页

   The Director maintained that, although the documentation of educational material and resources appeared to be new evidence, the nature of the evidence had not changed; the Director concluded that while the evidence demonstrated that the Petitioner is a well-established professional in his field, the record did not show the potential national impact of the endeavor as described.

   查看英文原件 · 第 3 页

   The Director denied a subsequent motion to reopen and reconsider.

   查看英文原件 · 第 1 页
5. 上诉

   申请人向行政上诉办公室提出上诉。上诉中，申请人重申拟议事业的实质价值和国家重要性，并举例强调低成本或免费STEM教育对美国经济萧条地区的潜在影响；其主张通过该组织扩大教育可支持白宫关于通过传统黑人学院和大学推进教育公平、卓越和经济机会的倡议。

   核对原文依据

   On appeal, the Petitioner reiterates the merit and national importance of his proposed endeavor. He anecdotally highlights the potential impact of low- or no-cost education in the fields of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) on economically depressed regions in the U.S.

   查看英文原件 · 第 3 页

   Although I offers training programs and operates as a certified testing center that administers IT certification exams, the Petitioner asserts that the expanded availability of education offered through I Iwould support the White House Initiative on Advancing Educational Equity, Excellence, and Economic Opportunity Through Historically Black Colleges and Universities.

   查看英文原件 · 第 3 页
6. 上诉决定

   行政上诉办公室重新审查后，认定申请人未证明拟议事业的国家重要性，未满足Dhanasar第一项标准，因此不符合国家利益豁免资格；上诉被驳回。

   核对原文依据

   The record does not establish the national importance of the proposed endeavor as required by the first prong of the Dhanasar precedent decision. Therefore, the Petitioner has not demonstrated eligibility for a national interest waiver.

   查看英文原件 · 第 4 页

   ORDER: The appeal is dismissed.

   查看英文原件 · 第 4 页

逐项证据分析

按争议点查看申请主张、原审意见、具体证据与 AAO 理由。点击每项标题可展开或收起。

阅读提示与适用边界

以下为基于本案的材料核对提示，不是 AAO 对其他案件的裁定。

• 阅读提示：核对原审补件请求中“过于笼统和模糊”的具体表述，以及申请人回应中关于雇主培训二十一年和资助来源的证据，判断这些材料针对的是实质价值还是国家重要性。
  核对原文依据

  The Director requested additional evidence to establish the Petitioner's qualifications under the Dhanasar framework, stating that the overall description of the proposed endeavor was "too general and vague."

  查看英文原件 · 第 3 页
• 阅读提示：核对动议阶段提交的教学材料、学生证言和职位邀请信，注意原审主任认为证据性质未变，且仅显示申请人是成熟专业人士而非事业的国家影响；AAO未在上诉中逐项重新评价这些材料。
  核对原文依据

  The Director maintained that, although the documentation of educational material and resources appeared to be new evidence, the nature of the evidence had not changed; the Director concluded that while the evidence demonstrated that the Petitioner is a well-established professional in his field, the record did not show the potential national impact of the endeavor as described.

  查看英文原件 · 第 3 页
• 阅读提示：核对AAO对Dhanasar第一项标准的适用边界，即审查对象是具体拟议事业而非IT或STEM教育领域的重要性；本案未审理第二、第三项标准，不能据此推断这些标准已满足或失败。
  核对原文依据

  In determining national importance, the relevant question is not the importance of the industry, field, or profession in which an individual will work; instead, to assess national importance, we focus on the "specific endeavor that the foreign national proposes to undertake."

  查看英文原件 · 第 3 页

  Because the identified basis for dismissal is dispositive of the Petitioner's appeal, we decline to reach and hereby reserve remaining arguments concerning eligibility under the Dhanasar framework.

  查看英文原件 · 第 4 页