computer science
EB-2 National Interest Waiver — Merits Decision
Underlying petition: DENIED · Service Center Operations (SCOPS)
Legal elements discussed — Matter of Dhanasar
Prong 1 — Substantial Merit & National Importance
FAILPetitioner argued: recommendation letters support national importance
Evidence type: recommendation letters
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) finding: INSUFFICIENT
“the letters do not include persuasive and corroborating information about the Petitioner's proposed endeavor and its impact rising to the level of national importance”
Decision PDF, p. 6Open source PDF
Petitioner argued: proposed endeavor has national importance due to wireless industry's economic impact and need for network architecture
Evidence type: articles and reports
USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT
“they do not specifically mention the Petitioner's proposed endeavor and its impact rising to the level of national importance”
Decision PDF, p. 5Open source PDF
Petitioner argued: work is critical to national technological leadership and has applications in critical and emerging technologies
Evidence type: National Science and Technology Council's list
USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT
“The Petitioner's documentation do not specifically mention his name or his research on wireless network connectivity and performance”
Decision PDF, p. 5Open source PDF
Prong 2 — Well Positioned to Advance the Endeavor
NOT_DISCUSSEDProng 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 national importance. 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 1 (substantial merit & national importance), USCIS found the petitioner's recommendation letters insufficient to establish that recommendation letters support national importance. 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?