industrial engineering and operations…
EB-2 National Interest Waiver — Merits Decision
Underlying petition: DENIED · —
Legal elements discussed — Matter of Dhanasar
Prong 1 — Substantial Merit & National Importance
PASSPetitioner argued: proposed research has substantial merit and national importance
Evidence type: personal statement, publications, citation records, industry reports, letters of support
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) finding: ACCEPTED
“the Petitioner has demonstrated both the substantial merit and national importance of his proposed research endeavor”
Decision PDF, p. 3Open source PDF
Prong 2 — Well Positioned to Advance the Endeavor
FAILPetitioner argued: education, experience, expertise, record of success, influence, and future plan position him well
Evidence type: academic records, publications, citation record, letters of support, funding evidence
USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT
“the record lacks sufficient evidence demonstrating that the Petitioner's research has been implemented or has influenced his field beyond being referenced or relied upon by others in their research publications.”
Decision PDF, p. 5Open source PDF
Prong 3 — Balancing the Waiver's Benefits
NOT_DISCUSSEDWhat this decision can’t tell you
This decision comes from a case that was denied and then appealed. Every case here is in that position — it cannot be used to estimate an overall approval rate, and it cannot predict the outcome of any individual case, including yours. USCIS officers exercise discretion on facts that are never fully captured in a written decision.
This decision turned on whether the person was well-positioned to advance the endeavor. Describe your own work and see which decisions discussed the same issue.
Describe your situation →Related decisions
Questions this raises for your lawyer
- On Prong 2 (well positioned to advance the endeavor), USCIS found the petitioner's academic records, publications, citation record, letters of support, funding evidence insufficient to establish that education, experience, expertise, record of success, influence, and future plan position him well. What would make comparable evidence in my own case more persuasive?
- What in my own case most resembles the specific facts USCIS focused on in this decision?
- Would additional expert-opinion evidence have changed the outcome here, based on what USCIS said was missing?