communications and networking…
EB-2 National Interest Waiver — Merits Decision
Underlying petition: DENIED · —
Legal elements discussed — Matter of Dhanasar
Prong 1 — Substantial Merit & National Importance
PASSProng 2 — Well Positioned to Advance the Endeavor
PASSProng 3 — Balancing the Waiver's Benefits
PASSPetitioner argued: the urgency of the national interest in his proposed endeavor is supported by the listing of artificial intelligence and communication and networking technologies as critical and emerging technologies (CETs) by the National Science and Technology Council
Evidence type: government listing
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) finding: ACCEPTED
“We acknowledge that the United States' competitiveness in STEM fields such as the Petitioner's may be a factor in showing that the national interest in his work is sufficiently urgent.”
Decision PDF, p. 2Open source PDF
Petitioner argued: the fact that he currently holds this research position is irrelevant to whether it would be impractical for him to obtain a labor certification
Evidence type: argument
USCIS finding: INSUFFICIENT
“the Petitioner asserts that the fact that he currently holds this research position is irrelevant to whether it would be impractical for him to obtain a labor certification, but provides no explanation of why that process would be impractical in his case.”
Decision PDF, p. 2Open source PDF
Petitioner argued: an advanced STEM degree and engagement in work furthering a CET are strong positive factors
Evidence type: policy manual
USCIS finding: ACCEPTED
“an advanced STEM degree (particularly a Ph.D.) together with evidence of engagement in work furthering a CET are strong positive factors in determining whether the United States may benefit from a petitioner's contributions”
Decision PDF, p. 2Open 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 satisfied all three Dhanasar prongs. Describe your own work and see which decisions discussed the same issue.
Describe your situation →Related decisions
Questions this raises for your lawyer
- On appeal, government listing was enough to satisfy Prong 3 (balancing the waiver's benefits). What made that evidence hold up where the original filing apparently didn't?
- This appeal succeeded after an initial denial. What new evidence or argument was added at the appeal stage, and could I include that from the start instead of waiting for a denial?
- How does this petitioner's fact pattern compare to mine on the elements USCIS cared about?