货运代理与创业者 · NIW 国家利益豁免：动议驳回（2023年9月11日）

案件背景

申请人自述为货运代理及创业者，通过I-140表格申请EB-2第二优先类别（高等学位专业人士）并请求国家利益豁免，免除职位邀请要求。德州服务中心认定其符合高等学位专业人士资格，但未认定豁免职位邀请要求符合国家利益；上诉被驳回后，申请人提出复议动议。

审理经过

1. 初次决定

   德州服务中心拒绝原申请：认定申请人符合高等学位专业人士资格，但未认定豁免职位邀请要求符合国家利益；并认定拟议事业不具国家重要性、申请人未证明处于推进该事业的有利地位、平衡上豁免职位邀请要求有利于美国。

   核对原文依据

   The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the petition, concluding that although the Petitioner qualifies as an advanced degree professional, the Petitioner did not establish that a waiver of the job offer requirement would be in the national interest.

   查看英文原件 · 第 1 页

   The Director further found that the Petitioner did not establish he is well established to advance his proposed endeavor, and that on balance, it would be beneficial to the United States to waive the requirements of a job offer, and thus of a labor certification.

   查看英文原件 · 第 2 页
2. 上诉

   AAO驳回上诉：同意原审关于拟议事业具有实质价值的认定，但认定申请人未证明拟议事业具有国家重要性，因此不符合国家利益豁免资格；对第二、第三项要件保留意见，因第一项要件未满足而无须审理。

   核对原文依据

   We also found that the Petitioner had not established that the proposed endeavor has national importance, as required by the first prong of Dhanasar. Therefore, we concluded that the Petitioner is not eligible for a national interest waiver. We reserved our opinion regarding whether the record satisfies the second and third prongs of Dhanasar, as it was not necessary to reach these based on the Petitioner not meeting the first prong.

   查看英文原件 · 第 2 页
3. 复议动议

   申请人提交书面论证意见，主张先前决定错误，并引用近期关于创业者的USCIS指引，试图证明拟议事业具有实质价值；其余内容几乎逐字重述上诉时的主张，涉及国家重要性、处于推进事业的有利地位及平衡上豁免有利于美国。

   核对原文依据

   On motion, the Petitioner submits a brief and contests the correctness of our prior decision. In support of the motion, the Petitioner cites to recent USCIS guidance related to entrepreneurs to show that his proposed endeavor has substantial merit.

   查看英文原件 · 第 2 页

   The remainder of the Petitioner's brief restates his assertions made in his appeal, almost word for word, to show that his proposed endeavor has national importance, that he is well positioned to advance his proposed endeavor, and that on balance, waiving the job offer requirement would benefit the United States.

   查看英文原件 · 第 2 页
4. 复议动议决定

   AAO驳回复议动议：认定申请人未指出先前决定在法律或政策适用上的错误，也未说明该决定依据当时记录证据为何错误。

   核对原文依据

   While the Petitioner disagrees with our previous conclusion that the record did not show the national importance ofthe Petitioner's proposed endeavor, on motion to reconsider, he has not established that we misapplied law or USCIS policy, and that our prior decision was incorrect based on the evidence in the record at the decision. Therefore, the motion will be dismissed.

   查看英文原件 · 第 3 页

   ORDER: The motion to reconsider is dismissed.

   查看英文原件 · 第 3 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：本案为复议动议程序，审查范围限于AAO最新决定是否错误适用法律或政策，并非对国家利益豁免资格的重新全面审理；核对材料时应区分上诉阶段的主张与本次复议书面论证意见。
  核对原文依据

  A motion to reconsider must establish that our prior decision was based on an incorrect application of law or policy and that the decision was incorrect based on the evidence in the record of proceedings at the time of the decision.

  查看英文原件 · 第 1 页
• 阅读提示：关于创业者国家利益豁免的USCIS指引在本案中仅被用于实质价值问题，而实质价值并非争议点；该指引不能替代对AAO先前国家重要性结论的法律或政策适用错误论证。
  核对原文依据

  However, the substantial merit ofthe Petitioner's proposed endeavor is not at issue, as the Director found that the proposed endeavor has substantial merit, and we concurred in our appeal decision.

  查看英文原件 · 第 2 页
• 阅读提示：Dhanasar第二、第三项要件在本案中未被实体审理，AAO明确保留意见；不得将保留理解为满足或失败。
  核对原文依据

  We reserved our opinion regarding whether the record satisfies the second and third prongs of Dhanasar, as it was not necessary to reach these based on the Petitioner not meeting the first prong.

  查看英文原件 · 第 2 页