machine learning
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
PASSPetitioner argued: proposed endeavor has national importance
Evidence type: publication and citation record, funding, support letters
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) finding: ACCEPTED
“The Petitioner's publication and citation record demonstrates the broader impact of his work related to his proposed endeavor in his field.”
Decision PDF, p. 2Open source PDF
Prong 2 — Well Positioned to Advance the Endeavor
PASSPetitioner argued: well positioned to advance proposed endeavor
Evidence type: education, skills, record of success
USCIS finding: ACCEPTED
“SCOPS determined the Petitioner is well positioned to advance his proposed endeavor. We agree.”
Decision PDF, p. 4Open source PDF
Prong 3 — Balancing the Waiver's Benefits
FAILPetitioner argued: waiver would be beneficial to the United States
Evidence type: no evidence of impracticality or urgency
USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT
“The relevant evidence does not show that it would be impractical for the Petitioner to obtain a job offer or labor certification and does not establish that the national interest in the Petitioner's contributions is sufficiently urgent to warrant forgoing the labor certification process.”
Decision PDF, p. 5Open source PDF
What 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 the balancing test for waiving a job offer and labor certification. 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 3 (balancing the waiver's benefits), USCIS found the petitioner's no evidence of impracticality or urgency insufficient to establish that waiver would be beneficial to the United States. 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?