No. 24-1228

JANINE CAVALCANTI VIANA GUEDES; JOSE MAURICIO OLIVEIRA GUEDES, JR.,

Plaintiffs, Appellants,

v.

ALEJANDRO MAYORKAS, Secretary of U.S. Department of Homeland Security; UR M. JADDOU, Director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS); TERRI A. ROBINSON, Boston District Director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services; EMILY ROSE F. COSTA, Director of USCIS Boston Field Office,

Defendants, Appellees.

APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

[Hon. William G. Young, U.S. District Judge]

Before

Rikelman, Selya, and Lynch, Circuit Judges.

Felipe Alexandre for appellants.

Aneesa Ahmed, Trial Attorney, United States Department of Justice, Civil Division, Office of Immigration Litigation -- District Court Section, with whom Brian M. Boynton, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Civil Division, William C. Peachey, Director, Office of Immigration Litigation, William C. Silvis, Assistant Director, Office of Immigration Litigation, and Cara E. Alsterberg, Senior Litigation Counsel, Office of Immigration Litigation, were on brief, for appellees. December 16, 2024 LYNCH, Circuit Judge. In this case, appellants attempt to challenge the USCIS denial of their applications for adjustment of status and alleged revocation of Viana Guedes' I-140 petition and National Interest Waiver. The district court dismissed the action for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. Because 8 U.S.C § 1252(a)(2)(B) and Patel v. Garland, 596 U.S. 328 (2022) preclude judicial review of all these asserted claims, we affirm.

I.

On November 27, 2017, Janine Cavalcanti Galvao Viana Guedes and her husband Jose Mauricio Oliveira Guedes Jr. and their three children, of Brazil, entered the United States on B-2 nonimmigrant six-month visas. USCIS originally modified Viana Guedes' visa status on her application to that of F-1 international student, and her husband was granted derivative beneficiary status.1 As a nonresident seeking permanent resident status, on October 23, 2019, Viana Guedes filed an I-140 petition representing that she was a "member[] of the professions holding advanced degrees or their equivalent or . . . [her] exceptional ability in the sciences, arts, or business[] will substantially benefit prospectively the national economy, cultural or educational interests, or welfare of the United States . . ." ("EB-2"). 8

1 Because Viana Guedes' husband is a derivative beneficiary of Viana Guedes, his claim turns on the adjudication of Viana Guedes' USCIS filings, which are the only filings we discuss.

- 3 - U.S.C. § 1153(b)(2)(A). Rather than provide evidence of a job offer for her services in the United States, as is generally required for an EB-2 classification, see 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(2)(A), she sought an NIW, under which the Attorney General "may, when . . . deem[ed] . . . to be in the national interest . . . waive the requirement[] . . . that an alien's services in the sciences, arts, professions, or business be sought by an employer in the United States," 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(2)(B)(i) (emphasis added); see 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(4)(ii) (USCIS "may exempt the requirement of a job offer, and thus of a labor certification, for aliens of exceptional ability in the sciences, arts, or business if exemption would be in the national interest." (emphasis added)). On September 22, 2021, based on Viana Guedes' representations but without