industrial engineering
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: Beneficiary's skills and accomplishments demonstrate national importance
Evidence type: letters of recommendation
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) finding: INSUFFICIENT
“While they praise the Beneficiary's skills and past work, these letters do not establish the potential prospective impact of his proposed endeavor.”
Decision PDF, p. 3Open source PDF
Petitioner argued: Beneficiary's work is international in scope and impacts global customers
Evidence type: support letter
USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT
“The Petitioner does not, however, establish how the Beneficiary's work extends beyond the Petitioner and its customers to impact the beverage industry or the industrial engineering field more broadly at a level indicative of national importance.”
Decision PDF, p. 2Open source PDF
Petitioner argued: Beneficiary has a critical role within the Petitioner, which forms part of the nation's critical infrastructure
Evidence type: memorandum and article
USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT
“The memorandum and article do not discuss the Beneficiary's proposed endeavor.”
Decision PDF, p. 3Open 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 letters of recommendation insufficient to establish that beneficiary's skills and accomplishments demonstrate 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?